












4^ * 



» -^ safe* j>°* 













4? *•*&£* * v 



l/ .vgfefe %/ '&&. \/ *Sta * 



^0 






V ** ^ 







-./ %. 



;* ** ^ 












**. .*** 



:• w 















o 

* o 










^ .<£ 



; 'v\,i 



? ;■:■< 



IpS 



? 



r <u<r :jmM:. ^*«* :. 



• ^;, -^ 



V* 









-" ,:-W.^>. '^ 



v-,' 



r-,t v -; 






S J^-J 










&\ 










,v : '-,. 



;* ^ «^ v V- *.• 



r*' .a 



^'-"•^ 













Redeemer and Redeemed 



AN INVESTIGATION 



-)F THE ATONEMENT AND OF 
ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 



By CHARLES BEECHER 

GEORGETOWN, MASS. 



"The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's 
salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and neces- 
sary consequence may be deduced from Scripture." — Westminster Confession, Chap. 
I. § vi. 



BOSTON: 
LEE AND SHEPARD 

149 Washington Street. 
1864. 



1 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1863, by 

CHARLES 13 EEC HER, 

in the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts. 



2. rs~ fr 




University Press: 
Welch, Bigelow, and Compj 

Cambridge. 



To 

her who gave me 

birth ; consecrated me to the 

ministry ; died before I knew her ; whom, next 

to my Redeemer, I most desire to meet in the Resurrection, 

TO ROXANA BEE CHER 

I dedicate this work, for the execution of which I am chiefly 

glad to have lived ; in the hope that she will 

not, on account of it, be sorry 

for having borne 

me. 



PREFACE. 



I awoke into consciousness in a sphere of intense relig- 
ious thought and emotion. My father was in his prime 
when the first dawnings of my mind which memory 
recalls occurred, and by his profound faith in eternal 
things, evinced in every conceivable way, stimulated to 
the highest degree those supernatural and ideal tenden- 
cies predominant in my constitution. 

Almost the earliest feeling I can recollect is a constant 
longing for something indefinite, — a feeling mysterious, 
and sad beyond description. I can remember lying on the 
floor and looking at the sunbeams on the carpet, when I 
could not have been more than five years of age, and 
thinking how unhappy I was, and philosophizing on the 
subject in a kind of bewildered wonder. I can recall 
summer evenings when the great family mansion at Litch- 
field was left empty, — the doors wide open, and the 
crickets were cutting the air like a fife, shrill and keen, — 
feeling a sense of desolation, and a yearning for some- 
thing unknown, that no sadness or sorrow of maturcr 
years has ever surpassed. 

The great ideas my father's mind was unfolding and 
exhaling like an atmosphere around him I breathed in 
with faith as absolute as it was unconscious. The recep- 
tivity of my soul was boundless, its appetite insatiable. 
All the sublime things my father caused to pass before 



vi PREFACE. 

me I received with avidity, asking only for more. I can 
remember grave homilies on total depravity and other 
abstrnse doctrines, when I could not have been above six 
or seven years old. " Henry, do you know that every 
breath you draw is sin? Well, it is, — every breath I" 
There was a profound satisfaction in being thorough, even 
in those early days, that I have not yet entirely out- 
grown. The severity of the conception did not appal 
me in the least, while its terrible radicalism was irresist- 
ibly fascinating. 

Everything that my father thought I thought, every- 
thing he believed I believed, everything he felt I felt, 
everything he described I saw. My father's sister, known 
in the household annals only as Aunt Esther, who was 
a mother to me, was a kind of lens which brought my 
father's influence to a focus. For although more aes- 
thetic than he, and adapted to stimulate the ideal, she 
had a pupil already developed, and in no need of stimu- 
lus. I remember once attempting to read aloud to her 
in Pilgrim's Progress, and on coming to the escape from 
Giant Despair's castle, I was seized with such a fit of 
trembling that she was obliged to take the book away and 
give it to Henry to finish the chapter. 

To the power of my father's appeals from the pulpit my 
whole soul responded from the beginning. I seem to hear 
his voice coming up out of the mists preceding memory, 
vibrating certain texts of Scripture as sharp two-edged 
swords piercing my very spirit through and through. Far 
back, when my spirit was just waking into life, as it were, 
out of the cloudland of infancy, I can hear him pleading 
with sinners to be reconciled to God. Certain texts of 
Scripture are not to me, and never can be, merely verses 
of a written word ; they are voices of my father, — voices 
instinct with emotion deep as eternity, incarnating them- 



PREFACE. VU 

selves within me. I can remember sitting under the old- 
fashioned Litchfield pulpit, before I was nine years of age, 
with face concealed and tears rolling down upon my coat, 
as I alternately listened to his words, and trembled lest 
my agitation should be noticed. 

All the features of his theological system were incor- 
porated with the substance of my mind, before I can 
distinctly remember. I grew up into life one intellect, 
one heart, one will with him. And as time passed on, 
and he moved forward to more controversial seasons, I 
moved with him, and into every blow he struck uncon- 
sciously threw the whole energy of my soul. Nor did the 
waywardness and sin of boyhood make the least differ- 
ence. The wicked Boston school-boy was not a whit the 
less ardent champion of the cross. 

When my mind woke from passive receptivity to active 
investigation, when I was born from the womb of my 
father's faith to the outer sphere of independent reason- 
ing, my mind was agitated, agonized. The faith of 
eternal realities was unchangeably fixed within me. The 
belief of the Bible as the word of God was like a part of 
myself. But the questions that have always fascinated 
earnest minds began to fascinate me. The origin of evil, 
the freedom of the will, and similar subjects, absorbed 
me, and I abandoned myself to them with the instinctive 
thoroughness and earnestness of my nature. They brought 
me to grief, but I cared not ; they threw me in collision 
with my father, but I could not ignore them. For a time 
they wrecked me, temporally, and threatened shipwreck 
eternal, but I could not forego them. By the mercy of 
God I outlived them. The time arrived when I could let 
them alone, and look at them from a safe distance, as 
I still do to this day. 

Then commenced the original investigation of the 



Vlll PKEFACE. 

Scriptures ; and here the great problem that from the 
first most occupied my thoughts was the problem of the 
cross. That Christ was God I never for a moment doubt- 
ed. That man was a fallen, ruined race, born under the 
just wrath of God and curse of a holy law, I was equally 
certain. That Christ's death was necessary to man's sal- 
vation was to me self-evident. But why the blood of 
Christ should be necessary, or what connection it had with 
forgiveness, or how it operated to secure it, I knew not. 
I had no ideas on the subject except such as I had de- 
rived from my father, and the idea of a literal punishing 
of Christ in full for my sins was not among them. That 
idea I never heard preached, nor alluded to, except to be 
disproved. 

My starting-point of investigation, then, was here. In 
what imaginable way could the blood of Christ have any 
logical and intelligible connection with the forgiveness of 
human sin ? On that problem my mind has worked and 
struggled and agonized day and night, for twenty years, 
almost incessantly, and has found rest in the views pre- 
sented in this volume. As such I present them. I have 
no idea that many minds will be satisfied with them. I 
have learned by sad experience that what convinces me 
does not always convince other people. The most I can 
hope for is, that these views will interest the thoughtful, 
studious of the same grand system, as a specimen of the 
working out of the problem by a sincere and independent 
mind, whose sole desire is to grow in the knowledge of 
our Lord Jesus Christ. 

This is the way the subject looks to me. This is the 
way my mind works out the solution. It is the best I can 
do. Doubtless there are mistakes and errors involved, 
but I cannot now discover them ; and one motive in pub 
lishing is, that those who can may have the opportunity, if 



PREFACE. DC 

they deem it worth their while, kindly to point them 
out. 

Here let me caution the reader not to imagine that I 
propose the proof of pre-existence as the object of this 
discussion. I do not. Regarding this as the most prob- 
able of the three possible theories of the soul's origin, and 
deeming the argument of the " Conflict of Ages " logical 
and unanswerable, I have not hesitated to assume pre- 
existence as the foundation of my investigations with 
respect to the atonement. In Chapter XIV. I do # not 
endeavor to prove mere pre-existence, which might be 
celestial, or terrestrial, or timeless, but simply that our 
pre-existence was celestial, and our redemption a return 
to native holiness and heaven. It is rather an argument 
for something additional to pre-existence than for pre- 
existence itself. 

I am aware that to those who reject pre-existence this 
confession will be deemed fatal to my whole scheme. 
Your entire theory of atonement, it will be said, rests 
upon a mere assumption. To this my only answer at 
present is, that, if pre-existence be an unproved hypothesis, 
it is equal, in that respect, to the two other possible hy- 
potheses, — concreation and traduction, — of which nei- 
ther is proved, nor can be. Any theory of atonement 
founded upon either of these, then, is to one half the 
Church as really founded on an assumption as one 
founded on pre-existence. While the Church is divided 
and the origin of souls a mooted question, I simply claim 
that it is as scientific to found a theory of atonement 
upon one unproved hypothesis as upon another ; nor can 
concreation or traduction cast the first stone, in this 
respect, at pre-existence. 

Not that I would concede that pre-existence is, like 
these, a mere assumption. I am convinced that it is logi- 



X PREFACE. 

cally established by the " Conflict of Ages," and that it is 
susceptible of confirmation by accumulated circumstantial 
and moral evidence, equal in cogency to that for the im- 
mortality of the soul, the inspiration of the Bible, or any 
of the great doctrines of religion. 

In this connection I will add, that, while I agree with 
my brother, Dr. Edward Beecher, in the belief of pre-exist- 
ence, he is in no degree responsible for the details of my 
system here unfolded. The contents of these pages have 
not been submitted to his inspection, and for them, in so 
far as they innovate upon the current belief, I desire to 
be held alone responsible. 

If by the perusal of these pages any are incited to a 
fresh study of the Bible, and encouraged to think more 
freely and boldly on doctrinal subjects, and stimulated to 
push original investigation to the utmost ; above all, if 
any are sensibly attracted towards the adorable Redeemer, 
and inspired with a livelier curiosity, wonder, admiration, 
and love, as they gaze upon the chiefest among ten 
thousand, the altogether lovely, I shall rejoice that the 
life-long struggles of my spirit, agonizing to know the 
truth herein, have not been altogether in vain. 

Georgetown, Not. 6, 1863. 



CONTENTS 



CHAPTER I. 
Ancient Theoet 1 

CHAPTER II. 
Scholastic Theory 14 

CHAPTER III. 
Attack on the Scholastic Theory 26 

CHAPTER IV. 
New England Theory .40 

CHAPTER V. 
Attack on the New England Theory ..... 49 

CHAPTER VI. 
The Cross to destroy Satan 60 

CHAPTER VII. 

Azazel 65 

CHAPTER VIII. 
The Anointed Cherub .75 

CHAPTER IX. 
Son of God 88 

CHAPTER X. 
Only Begotten 95 

CHAPTER XI. 
The Eirst-born Ill 



Xll CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER XII. 
Dethronement of Lucifer 127 

CHAPTER XIII. 
Purification of Heaven 1.39 

CHAPTER XIV. 
Heavenly Fatherland 150 

CHAPTER XV. 
The Natural Man 169 

CHAPTER XVI. 
Melchisedec 189 

CHAPTER XVII. 
The Order of Melchisedec 206 

CHAPTER XVIII. 
The Ordeal 227 

CHAPTER XIX. 
The Advocate 243 

CHAPTER XX. 
Divine Sorrow 259 

CHAPTER XXI. 
Eternal Judgment 272 

CHAPTER XXII. 

Eternal Judgment ' . . . 290 

CHAPTER XXIII. 
Condition of the Lost 312 

CHAPTER XXIV. 
The World Convinced 319 

CHAPTER XXV. 
The Vial on the Air 335 

CHAPTER XXVI. 
Universal Praise 348 



REDEEMER AND REDEEMED 



CHAPTER I. 

ANCIENT THEORY. 
"Fob the love of Christ constkaineth us." — 2 Cor. v. 14. 

OUR Saviour said, " I, if I be lifted up, will draw all 
men unto me." We feel the attractive power of 
the cross. Our eye is irresistibly riveted upon that won- 
drous sacrifice. And as we gaze, in the mere act of 
beholding that astonishing oblation, our affections begin 
to kindle, our hearts are all aflame, and ere we are aware 
the "love of Christ constraineth us." 

It is only when we are thus influenced by ardent 
emotion, that we are in a fit condition to search out 
those depths " into which angels desire to look." 

Jesus Christ crucified was first exhibited to the eye 
of a sinful world. " Behold the Lamb of God ! " was the 
message of the Gospel. And as the eye obeyed, and 
the heart kindled, the human mind was led, under the 
stimulus of love, to frame as it might a rational theory 
of the fact presented to its inspection and appealing to 
its affections. 

The earliest theory — one which prevailed for more 
than a thousand years — is now become wellnigh unin- 
telligible to a popular audience, because certain con- 
ceptions familiar to antiquity have entirely dropped out 



2 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

of the civilized mind, and been replaced by concep- 
tions of which antiquity knew nothing. 

To the ancients, for example, Hades was the name 
of a sublime and awful reality, while we have lost both 
name and idea. In their view, Satan possessed a 
power of death over the inhabitants of Hades which 
was most real. But in modern thought, Satan is either 
denied or caricatured, or at best thrust into the back- 
ground, in discussions of the atonement, and forgotten. 
The main ideas of antiquity involved in Christ's work 
are almost as completely erased from the human mind 
as if man had quaffed the waters of Lethe. 

And the chief difficulty in giving an appreciative view 
of the theory of atonement of the ancient Church, is the 
lack of their customary, familiar, every-day ideas respect- 
ing the matters involved. To prepare the way, then, 
a few elements of ancient thought will be mentioned, 
which we should endeavor to reproduce in our own 
minds. And first in respect to the place of the dead, 
or Hades. 

Says a distinguished writer 1 : "At the Christian era, 
Hades appears to have been regarded as an immense 
cavern in the depths of the earth. No living man was 
supposed to have seen it, nor had any from the dead re- 
turned to describe it This subterranean cavern was 

popularly regarded as the dwelling of the human race." 

" To us," says Tertullian (A. D. 200), " Hades is a 
vast region extending upward and downward in the 
earth ; for we read that Christ passed the three days 
of his death in the heart of the earth, that is, in an in- 
ternal recess hollowed out within the earth." 

In this world Satan was regarded as all powerful, 
having the power of death. Says the author above 
mentioned 1 : " They supposed him to have detained in 
1 Huidekoper, Christ's Mission to the Underworld. 



ANCIENT THEORY. '6 

his gloomy regions below, and to have ruled over, the 
departed of the human family, until Christ descended 
for their liberation." This power, they thought, was 
in some sort Satan's right. Thus Irenseus, one of the 
earliest Fathers (A. D. 175), says : " The law burdened 
sinful man, by showing him to be the debtor of Death 
(i. e. due to Satan), and in order to his release Satan 

must be justly conquered His suffering was the 

means of awakening his sleeping disciples, on whose ac- 
count he descended into the lower parts of the earth." 

So Clement of Rome, in the first century, says : 
" The sole cause of the Lord's descent to Hades was 
to preach the Gospel." And Tertullian says : " He 
descended to the lower parts of the earth, that there 
he might make the patriarchs and prophets partici- 
pators of himself." Nor were these ideas peculiar to 
the few, but shared by all. 

" In the second and third centuries," says Huide- 
koper, " every branch and division of Christians, so far 
as their records enable us to judge, believed that Christ 
preached to the departed ; and this belief dates back 
to our earliest reliable sources of information." 

" If we have evidence that the Catholics of the sec- 
ond and third centuries believed any proposition unani- 
mously, it is the following: Jesus Christ at death went 
on a mission to the subterranean world." 

We come, then, nearer to the pivot of the doctrine 
in question, as it lay in their minds. 

If Satan was the owner of lawful captives, if Hades 
was his rightful realm and castle, how would he regard 
this visit of Christ, or any attempt on his part to lib- 
erate the prisoners ? To this they answered, that Christ 
could only do it by a fierce and desperate battle with 
Satan. 

The near prospect of this dreadful conflict they thought 



4 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

occasioned tlie agony in the garden, and the bloody 
sweat. 

The whole of the twenty-second Psalm they regarded 
as prophetically depicting his emotions in that crisis, and 
the words, — " Be not far from me, O Lord, for trouble 

is near ; for there is none to help Save me from 

the lion's mouth," — they understood to be spoken in 
reference to the dreaded encounter with the infernal 
powers. 

If we would realize at all the posture of the ancient 
mind, " we should imagine the infernal powers, greedy 
for their prey, as already gathering round their victim 
on the cross, the angels as shrinking in panic from the 
descent, and the Saviour as hurried to the underworld, 
in the gloom of whose mighty cavern, unaided and alone, 
he was to prove his strength against the King of Terrors 
and the thronging legions of darkness. No whisper of 
incredulity should blunt our perceptions of the Saviour's 
fidelity, — faithful to the conflict whence all save him had 
fled, — or prevent us from realizing his dread of it ; for 
he forgets the agony of the cross in a prayer, not for 
support under his sufferings, but for the Divine aid in 
that more dreadful struggle which impended. Doubt 
should not check the rising enthusiasm when we learn 
that he ' broke in the adamantine gates of Death,' 
and 'wrestled with the powers there as their master.' 
Unbelief should not quell the thrill of triumph, when 
we are told that he crushed man's enemy in the se- 
curity of his own fortress ; that he rove asunder his 
eternal prison-house, liberated his captives, desolated his 
kingdoms, and drove him forth a homeless vagabond, 
to glean by plunder in the byways a band of the un- 
faithful." 1 

Thus Jesus became a ransom. " A ransom," says 
1 Huidekoper, p. 79. 



ANCIENT THEORY. 6 

Origen, "is a gift to enemies given by the conquered, 
or by their leader, for the liberation of the captives. If, 
therefore, we were bought with a price, we were bought 
from some one whose slaves we were, and who de- 
manded such a price as he pleased for the release of 
those whom he held. It was the Devil who held us 
by our sins. He therefore demanded as our price the 
blood of Christ. 

" To whom did Christ give his soul a ransom for 
many ? Not, of course, to God. Was it, then, to the 
Evil One ? Certainly, for he held us in his power, 
until the soul of Jesus should be given him as our 
ransom, he being deceived by the supposition that he 
could hold it in subjection." 

The language of Irenseus, two centuries earlier than 
Origen, is even more emphatic. 

" And since the Apostate acquired his mastery over 
us unjustly, the "Word behaved justly even to the Apos- 
tate, redeeming from him his own, not by force, but by 
persuasion, — persuading him without violence to accept 
what he proposed." "It was proper that Satan should 
be bound by a man, when conquered, that man being 
freed, should return to God." 

Still earlier, Justin Martyr says, we should give thanks 
to God " for the overthrow of the ' powers and au- 
thorities,' (the evil spirits,) with a perfect overthrow 
through him who, in accordance with his will, became 
subject to suffering." 

Says Neander : " The sufferings of Christ are repre- 
sented by Irenseus as having a just connection with the 
rightful deliverance of man from the power of Satan. 
The Divine justice is displayed here, in allowing even 
Satan to have his due. Of satisfaction to Divine justice 
as yet not the slightest mention is found." 

" This theory," says Dr. Knapp, " was first adopted 



6 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

by the Greek Church, and especially by Origen, through 
whose influence it became prevalent, and was adopted 
at length by Basil, the two Gregories, Nestorius, and 
others. From the Greeks it was communicated to the 
Latins, among whom it was distinctly held by Ambrose, 
and afterwards by Augustine, through whose influence 
it was rendered almost universal in the Latin Church. 
Ever after the fall, they said, the Devil had the 
whole human race in his power; he ruled over them 
like a tyrant over his vassals, and employed them for 
his own purposes ; from this captivity God might in- 
deed have rescued men by omnipotence, but was re- 
strained by his justice from doing this with violence. 
He therefore offered Satan a ransom, in consideration 
of which he should release mankind. This ransom was 
the death of Christ. In the Latin Church they endeav- 
ored to perfect the theory. Satan, they added, was 
deceived in the transaction ; for, taking Jesus to be a 
mere man, and not knowing that he was also the Son 
of God, he was not able to retain even him, after he 
had slain him. And it was necessary for Christ to as- 
sume a human body, in order to deceive the Devil, as 
fish are caught by baits." x 

So prevalent was this theory in the Latin Church, 
before the twelfth century, that Abelard declares, " All 
our teachers since the Apostles agree in this." And Ber- 
nard of Clairvaux affirmed that whoever denied it ought 
rather to be chastised with rods than reasoned with. 

Hagenbach says : " They saw in the death of Christ the 
actual victory over the Devil." This idea, says Bauer, 
" was so congruous with the whole circle of ideas in 
which the times moved, that they could not abandon it." 
Says Schaff : "The negative part of the doctrine, the sub- 
jection of the Devil, the prince of the kingdom of sin and 
1 Christian Theology, (Lond. ed.,) p. 354. 



ANCIENT THEORY. 7 

death, was naturally most dwelt on in the patristic period. 
This theory continued current until the satisfaction theory 
of Anselm gave a new turn to the development of the 
dogma." 

The element of deception that runs through this 
theory, and which is revolting to our conceptions of the 
Divine character, was not noticed or felt by the less 
sensitive mind of the Church during those many ages 
while this theory prevailed. 

The principle of pious frauds, or accomplishing good 
ends by the use of deception, was so early introduced, 
and so universally established, that the susceptibility was 
deadened. There was nothing in the mind of Christen- 
dom to revolt from a theory which implied that God actu- 
ally cheated Satan out of his entire right and title to 
the human race. 

This feature, so abhorrent to us, and which would 
prevent such a theory from exciting in our minds any 
feelings of adoring love, would not in the least shock 
them, nor prevent them from feeling gratitude. It was 
not, in their view, inconsistent for God to do so. They 
rather exulted in it, as an evidence of his superior wis- 
dom, — that he could thus take the wise in their own 
craftiness, and beat Satan at his own weapons. And 
hence their minds could feel the unbroken stimulus to 
love of Christ's sublime encounter with the Prince of 
Hell. 

There was something fascinating to the imagination in 
it, that completely dominated over that rude and iron 
age. It awoke all their love of the marvellous, all their 
sense of the sublime, all their pity, horror, and shud- 
dering sympathy. 

That Jesus, a helpless man, alone dared to meet the 
wrath of demons dire, treading that downward path 
from which the angels shrunk, — that in the heart of the 



8 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

infernal dungeon he met the enemy, and engaged in 
personal conflict against him and all his legions, — that 
he defeated them, and with infinite strength broke the 
adamantine gates, and crushed the eternal barriers, — 
these ideas thrilled their whole being through and 
through, and woke towards Jesus their highest admi- 
ration and adoring love. 

It surrounded Jesus with all the coloring of romance. 
It made him a hero, above all the heroes of tale or 
song, and it gave him a direct and touching claim upon 
the gratitude of those for whose captivity he had paid 
the ransom. 

For a thousand years and more this theory supplied 
motives to gratitude and affection ; and, imperfect as 
it was, yet contained so many elements of truth and 
so many apparent truths, that the love of Christ actu- 
ally constrained men. 

From a consideration of this subject several reflections 
are naturally suggested. 

It must be evident that a belief in a correct theory 
of atonement is one thing, and a belief in the fact, or 
in Christ as an atoning Saviour, is quite another thing ; 
and that, while to believe in the fact is essential to sal- 
vation, to believe in the theory is not. The theory 
pertains to the higher truths of the system, for advanced 
and mature minds. 

If a belief in a theory of atonement be made essen- 
tial to salvation, we fall into a dilemma. Here is a 
theory held by the Church for a thousand years, about 
which the Church now knows nothing. And again, the 
Church for more than six hundred years has held a 
theory of atonement about which the ancient Church 
knew nothing. Now, if one of these theories be true, 
the other is false, and vice versa. And if a belief of 
the true is essential to salvation, the belief of the false 



ANCIENT THEORY. V 

must be fatal. Hence we have our choice of alterna- 
tives. If the modern theory of atonement be true, the 
whole ancient Church for more than ten centuries is 
lost. And if the ancient theory be true, then the whole 
modern Church is lost. 

Therefore it is plain, that a belief in the correct 
theory of atonement is not absolutely essential to sal- 
vation, but only a belief in the substance, or fact. The 
mistake that has been made here is somewhat the same 
as if it should be thought necessary for a starving man 
not only to eat bread, but believe in the correct theory 
of bread-making ; or necessary for the sick not merely 
to take medicine, but also to be perfectly informed of 
its nature and the scientific principles on which it oper- 
ates. The sick man needs medicine, not a theory of 
medicine. The starving man needs bread, not a theory 
of bread. The dying sinner needs the flesh and blood 
of a slain Jesus, not a theory of atonement. It is the 
fact that Jesus suffered and died for me that melts my 
heart, and makes the love of Jesus constrain me ; not 
the theory of how that death operated to effect my sal- 
vation. It is simply the fact of a dying Lord on which 
faith feeds, — the fact of a body broken, and blood shed 
for me, — not the manner, the philosophy, which con- 
stitutes the first principle of my faith and love. All 
beyond that pertains to the higher truths of the sys- 
tem, and is strong meat for men of mature age. The 
study of the theory, the philosophy of atonement, is for 
Christian manhood, for perfection in Divine knowledge, 
and as such is of great importance. But that which is 
essential to be received by babes in Christ is no more 
than can be understood by babes, the simple, the poor, 
the illiterate, children of tender age, and converts from 
the lowest grades of human guilt and distress. 

The great multitude of those who have truly be- 
l* 



10 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

lieved, have believed the fact that Christ died for their 
salvation ; but how his death operated, the philosophy 
of the problem, they have been no more capable of 
understanding than the problems of geometry or conic 
sections. They have felt that they were lost ; they 
have seen the Lamb of God that taketh away the 
sins of the world ; they have seen Calvary ; they have 
felt that there was a profound mystery of suffering 
there ; they have believed that that suffering was for 
them, that it was effectual, and they have loved the 
suffering Saviour that endured it ; they have loved him 
with a gratitude which could hardly be made more 
tender and ardent by their being acquainted with the 
abstruse question of how his blood sufficed; they have 
looked, not at the theory, but at him, — not at the prob- 
lem, but at the person ; and they have said, One thing 
I know, — I love that sufferer, that astonishing suf- 
ferer ; my heart goes out to him, and the love of Christ 
constraineth me." Therefore believers were saved under 
that theory of a ransom paid to Satan, — believers in- 
numerable for more than a thousand years, — because 
it was not the theory they loved, but the ransom, the 
sufferer himself, who they supposed went through such 
tremendous scenes. 

And so it is yet. It is not the belief in the modern 
theory, or theories, any of them, which saves the soul. 
Believers now do not say, " The love of the theory of 
atonement constrains me," but " The love of Christ." 
They see Jesus, they see Gethsemane, they see Calvary. 
And it is Jesus himself, loving, pitying, sorrowing, dy- 
ing, for our salvation, that pierces our heart with an 
almost agonizing tenderness and love. 

Hence we perceive the liberty that exists of investi- 
gation and difference of opinion upon the theory. 

In saying that a belief in the theory is not essential to 



ANCIENT THEORY. 11 

salvation, we do not understand that the atonement itself 
was not fundamental in the actual working out of God's 
plans of love. On the contrary, the atonement was the 
central measure of his eternal kingdom, on which all the 
destinies of the universe depend. 

But for that very reason, a full knowledge of it cannot 
be essential to babes in Christ, but must be classed among 
the higher truths of the system. Christians of advanced 
growth and mature faculties can understand the theory 
of atonement, because they can, and just so far as they 
can, understand the system of the universe, of which it 
is the central measure. 

Hence we can look at the attempts made by the mind 
of the Church, in all ages, to work out the problem, — at 
its mistakes, its strange ideas, — with a genuine interest 
and sympathy, but without horror, as if every mistake 
involved certain damnation. 

Another reflection which will occur to us is, that, 
wherever a theory has had such a universal and long- 
continued sway as the ancient theory had, there must be 
some foundation for it. 

The mind does not love unmixed error. Especially the 
Christian mind does not. Although it may embrace im- 
perfect and erroneous views, there must be considerable 
admixtures of truth. Hence there must have been in the 
most ancient and longest continued theory elements of 
important truth. 

What were those elements ? Not the deception prac- 
tised on Satan ; not the combat, part muscular and part 
magical, in Hades : these are the excrescences, the crudi- 
ties, of a rude and unphilosophical age. 

The grand element of truth must be in the prominence 
assigned by the ancient Church to certain passages of 
Scripture as vitally connected with this subject. These 
were Gen. iii. 15, the twenty-second and sixty-ninth 



12 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Psalms, Heb. ii. 14, 1 John iii. 8, and parallel passages. 
However the ancient Church may have been mistaken in 
interpreting these passages, and working out their detailed 
application, in the belief that they were fundamental to 
the atonement, they were not mistaken. The idea is im- 
possible. It is as certain that this class of passages are 
vitally concerned with a scientific theory of atonement, as 
that there is any atonement. And just to the extent that 
they are overlooked by any theory will that theory be 
imperfect, one-sided, and provincial. 

Finally, it is of the greatest importance that the in- 
vestigation of this doctrine be conducted from a starting- 
point of love to Christ. I have said, that a true conception 
of the theory of atonement is not essential to salvation, 
because the love of Christ, as a constraining motive, can 
be inspired by Christ himself, and his seen sufferings, in- 
dependent of the philosophy of the case. But now I go a 
step further, and say that a saving love to Christ, and a 
present life in God, are the indispensable condition for 
a right judgment of the sublime theory before us. The 
love of Christ does not constrain us because we under- 
stand the theory of his atonement, but we understand the 
theory of atonement, if at all, because the love of Christ 
constrains us. First the fact, — Jesus dies for my salva- 
tion ; then the feeling, — His love constrains me ; then 
the going on to perfection, to ask why and how was 
this mysterious sacrifice. If the theory goes foremost, 
it becomes abstract, metaphysical, cold, and deadening. 
The mind is not excited to feeling, but the reverse ; any 
little spark of feeling it possessed is quenched in a sea 
of metaphysics. 

Therefore love must go foremost. Love to Jesus should 
burn hot, and flame high, and throw its radiance out on 
the path of investigation. The love of Christ must con- 
strain us here as really as anywhere else. It should be 



ANCIENT THEOEY. 13 

a warm, adoring, idolizing love to him, that asks every 
question, Why was this ? what necessity called for it ? on 
what principle did it operate to redeem ? Then the dis- 
cussion can never grow cold and barren, but will indeed 
be strong meat for manly growth, and we shall go on unto 
perfection. Hence, Christian brethren, in inviting you 
to go on with me through the investigation of this great 
subject, let me first exhort you to love. Are your lamps 
trimmed and burning ? Is the fire on love's altar blazing- 
high and clear ? Is Jesus near and dear to you ? Do 
your affections move artlessly and ardently forth to him ? 
Does his love constrain you ? Here all believers can be 
alike. We may differ about many things, and yet feel 
alike towards the Saviour. All differences should be 
subordinate, and this one agreement be the uniting bond. 
Let us love that blessed One ; let our hearts be full of 
tenderness and glowing affection. Let us feel that He is 
" chiefest among ten thousand, and altogether lovely." 
Let us say, " Whom have I in heaven but Thee ? and 
there is none on earth I desire beside Thee." 

" Whate'er my noblest powers can wish 
In Thee doth richly meet ; 
Not to my eyes is light so dear, 
Nor friendship half so sweet ! " 



CHAPTER II. 

SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 
"Behold the Lamb of God." — John i. 29. 

THE earliest theory of atonement, after prevailing over 
a thousand years, was gradually supplanted, in the 
eleventh century, by the modern theory, wrought out by 
the scholastic divines, that Christ was a sacrifice to sat- 
isfy Divine justice. This theory may be reduced to two 
main propositions, the first of which is as follows : — 

Sin is so intrinsically deserving of punishment, that the 
non-execution of penalty in a single instance would be a 
crime in the Divine administration. 

" This avenging justice," says Turretin, " belongs to 
God as a judge, and he can no more dispense with it 
than he can cease to be a judge, or deny himself." 

" No man," says Dr. Hodge, " when humbled under 
a sense of his guilt in the sight of God, can resist the 
conviction of the inherent ill-desert of sin. He feels 
that it would be right that he should be made to suf- 
fer ; nay, that rectitude, justice, or moral excellence de- 
mands his suffering The justice of God, there- 
fore, is nothing but the holiness of God in relation to 
sin. So long as he is holy, he must be just ; he must 
repel sin, winch is the highest idea we can form of 
punishment." 

Professor Shedd thus affirms the principle : " The pri- 
mal source of law has no power to abolish penalty, any 
more than to abolish law." It is not optional, he says, 
with God to exercise justice, or not to exercise it, as is 



SCHOLASTIC THEOEY. 15 

the case with the attribute of mercy. " For the Deity 
cannot by an arbitrary and unprincipled procedure re- 
lease from penal suffering, and inflict a wound on 

that holy judicial nature." "For the correlate to guilt 
is punishment, and nothing but the correlate itself can 
perform the function of a correlate. A liquid, e. g., is 
the correlate to thirst, and nothing that is not liquid can 

be a substitute for it A judicial infliction is the 

only means by which culpability can be extinguished." 

Bradbury declares that to relax punishment is "so 
very inglorious to God, that it cannot be admitted." 
Bellamy repeatedly declares that God must, and that 
he " does always, throughout all his dominions, not only 
in word threaten, but in fact punish sin, with infinite 
severity, without the least mitigation or abatement in 
any one instance whatever." 

Accordingly, the celebrated Baptist preacher, Mr. Spur- 
geon, does not hesitate to employ such expressions as 
these : " We believe that God is so just, that every 
sinner must be punished, that every crime must have its 
irretrievable doom." " God does not absolutely pass over 
sin." " The way that God saves sinners is not by pass- 
ing over the penalty." 

Thus, in every form of words, do writers of this class 
enforce the principle that the penalty of sin in the gov- 
ernment of God never must, never can, and never does 
go unexecuted. If God did fail to execute a single pen- 
alty, he would be, in the language of these writers, 
arbitrary, unprincipled, unholy, inglorious, and unjust. 

The second proposition under this theory is as fol- 
lows : — 

God does in fact execute the full penalty of the law 
upon the sinner's substitute. 

Before citing passages upon this point, a single remark. 
It is not because God is supposed to be implacable and 



16 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

cruel, while Christ was merciful, that these writers take 
this position. " The love of God the Father," says Cal- 
vin, " precedes our reconciliation in Christ." " For God 
in a certain ineffable manner, at the same time that he 
loved us, was nevertheless angry with us." The prin- 
ciple is, that justice, pure and simple, calm and serene, 
must absolutely be satisfied, or God be stained with 
crime. Bearing this in mind, we proceed to develop 
the opinion of Divines upon this point. 

Calvin says : " It was requisite that Christ should feel 
the severity of the Divine vengeance, in order to ap- 
pease the wrath of God, and satisfy his justice ; hence 
it was necessary for him to contend with the powers of 
hell and the horror of eternal death." " He was made a 
substitute and surety for transgressors, and even treated 
as a criminal himself, to sustain all the punishments 
which would have been inflicted upon us." " Not only 
the body of Christ was given as the price of our re- 
demption, but there was another and more excellent 
ransom, since he suffered in his soul the dreadful tor- 
ments of a person condemned and irretrievably lost." 
" He experienced from God all the tokens of wrath and 
vengeance." 

Luther went so far as to affirm that our sins were 
so literally transferred to Christ, that they became his, 
and made him a sinner. " And this, no doubt, all the 
prophets did foresee in spirit, that Christ should become 
the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulterer, thief, rebel, 
blasphemer, that ever was or could be in the world." 

This literal interpretation is, however, almost univer- 
sally rejected. It is mentioned to show the thoroughness 
with which this theory was embraced by the Lutheran 
as well as the Calvinistic Reformers. 

In the Lutheran Formula of Concord, A. D. 1576, 
occurs the following : " We believe simply that Christ's 



SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 17 

whole person, God and man, after the burial, went to 
hell, overcame the Devil, destroyed the power of hell, 
and took all his might from the Devil." 

Similar views prevailed among Catholic divines. Thus 
Bourdaloue exclaims : " Long didst Thou look for this 
victim ! Seeing none but vile subjects in the world, guilty 
offenders, Thou didst find thyself reduced to a kind of 
impotency in avenging thyself. Now Thou hast where- 
with to do it fully, for behold a victim worthy of thyself, 
— a victim capable of expiating the sins of a thousand 
worlds ! Strike now, Lord, strike ! " 

" God does not content himself with striking him. He 
seems to wish to reject him, by forsaking and abandoning 
him in the midst of his punishment. This desertion and 
abandonment are in some respect the punishment of the 
damned, which Jesus Christ suffered for us all." "For 
it is not in the last judgment that an offended and in- 
dignant God will satisfy himself as a God. It is not in 
hell he will declare himself more formally a God of ven- 
geance : it is on Calvary. It is then his vindictive justice 
acts freely, and without restraint, not being checked as it 
is elsewhere by the littleness of the subject against whom 
it is exercised." 

Barrow, of the English Church, thus speaks : " God's 
indignation, so dreadfully flaming out against sin, might 
well astonish and terrify him. To stand before the mouth 
of hell, belching out fire and brimstone upon him, to lie 
down in the hottest furnace of Divine wrath, to undertake 
with his heart's blood to quench all the wrath of Heaven, 
and, all the flames of Hell, might well in the heart of a 
man beget inconceivable and inexpressible pressures of 
anguish." So John Howe declares that, " though sin be 
forgiven, it is punished, too ; forgiven to us, but punished 
in His own dear Son." And Bradbury says: "David 
speaks of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, which 



18 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

intimates that it was laid there ; that his sufferings were 
of such a nature as to be thus expressed." 

This, unequivocally, is the view of the Westminster 
Assembly : — " The Lord Jesus Christ, by his perfect 
obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he through the 
Eternal Spirit offered up unto the Father, hath fully satis- 
fied the justice of the Father." They speak of him as 
" having conflicted with the terrors of death and powers 
of darkness," as having "felt and borne the weight of 
God's wrath." They also say, he " endured most griev- 
ous torments immediately in his soul, and most painful 
sufferings in his body." 

President Edwards says : " God would not abate him 
one mite of that debt which justice demanded." " Christ 
was the mark of the vindictive expressions of the justice 
of God. Revenging justice then spent all its force upon 
him on account of our guilt, which made him sweat blood, 
and cry out upon the cross, and probably rent his vitals 
and broke his heart." 

"It is not," says the late Dr. Spencer, of Brooklyn, 
" because his body is in torment merely. No, no ; . . . . 
the wrath of God lay heavy on his soul ; the Father had 
forsaken him ; he was enduring the righteous displeasure 
of an angry God, and bearing the punishment of a guilty 
world." So also Dr. Spring : " The sins of the trans- 
gressor were set down to his account, and so imputed to 
him, that he endures the punishment of them in the sin- 
ner's place." He " encountered the storm of wrath which 
discharged itself upon the cross." 

" We have heard and read," says Mr. Spurgeon, " of 
many divines whose atonement is something like this. 
.... Jesus Christ did in some way — we understand 
n<_ t how — do something which allows God now to pass 
over our sins without punishing them at all. We under- 
stand not such an atonement as that. We believe that 



SCHOLASTIC THEOEY. 19 

God is so just, that eyery sinner must be punished, 
that every crime must have its irretrievable doom. We 
do not believe the atonement of Christ remits a single 
solitary sin. We believe that all the punishment which 
God's people ought to have endured was laid upon the 
head of Christ. ..... The punishment of all our guilt 

was absolutely and actually borne by Christ. God does 
not pass over sin ; he punishes sin in Christ, and hence- 
forth sin ceases to be punishable in the person of those for 
whom Christ died." 

" Here I stand, the sinner. I am condemned to die. 
Christ comes in and puts me aside, and stands himself 
in my stead. When the plea is demanded, Christ says, 
' Guilty ' ; takes my guilt to be his guilt. ' Punish me,' 
he says ; ' I have put my righteousness on that man, and 
I have taken that man's sins upon me. Father, punish 
me, and consider that man to have been me. Let him 
reign, and let. me suffer misery.' " 

" The moment the sinner believes in Christ, his sins are 
no longer his. They were laid on Christ, and are gone. 
The man stands guiltless in the sight of God ; more, he 
becomes meritorious ; for the moment Christ takes his sins, 
he takes Christ's righteousness." 

The testimony of Dr. Hodge, of Princeton, is similar. 
" Unless," says he, " the Redeemer was a sacrifice on 
whom our sins were laid, who bore the penalty we had 
incurred, it is no atonement." " Christ suffered the pen- 
alty of the law in our stead." 

Professor Shedd also declares : — 

" In the voluntary, the cordially offered sacrifice of the 
incarnate Son, the judicial nature of God, which by a con- 
stitutional necessity requires the punishment of sin, finds its 
righteous requirements fully met. Plenary punishment 
is inflicted upon one who is infinite, and therefore compe- 
tent, upon one who is finite, and therefore passible." The 



20 KEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

mercy of God " does not consist in outraging his own law 
and the guilt-smitten conscience itself, by simply snatching 
the criminal away from their retributions in the exercise of 
an unprincipled and unbridled almightiness, or in substitut- 
ing a partial for a complete atonement, but in enduring the 
full and entire penal infliction by which both are satisfied." 

" When the suffering and death of God incarnate is 
substituted for that of the creature, the satisfaction ren- 
dered to law is strictly plenary, though not identical with 
that which is exacted from the transgressor. It contains 
the element of infinitude, which is the element of value in 
the case, with even greater precision than the satisfaction 
of the creature does, because it is the suffering of a strictly 
infinite person in a finite time, while the latter is only the 
suffering of a finite creature in an endless but not strictly 
infinite time. A strictly infinite duration would be with- 
out beginning as well as without end. 

" Side by side in the Godhead there dwell the impulse 
to punish and the desire to pardon ; but the desire to 
pardon is realized in act by carrying out the impulse to 
punish, not indeed upon the person of the criminal, but 
upon that of his substitute. And the substitute is the 
Punisher himself." 

Such is the theory of the atonement that for the last six 
hundred years has been developed and defended in the 
Church, Catholic and Protestant. God pitied his sinful 
creatures, and desired to save them, but justice demanded 
the execution of penalty. Justice actually made punish- 
ment a necessity. Not to punish would be a crime greater 
than all the sin that creatures could commit, because it 
would be a crime in the Most High himself. 

Either, then, the sinner, however penitent, must bear 
his penalty, or some one must bear it for him. To this 
end Infinite Wisdom discovers a way. He gives his own 
Son. Christ consents. Upon him, as the sinner's surety, 



SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 21 

God executes full punishment, — a punishment sometimes 
identical with, sometimes only equivalent to, that due to 
the transgressors. At the same time, Christ's perfect 
obedience is imputed to the believer; he is freed from 
penalty, and endowed with full title to heavenly felicity. 

This theory is by no means obsolete. In New Eng- 
land, indeed, it is seldom heard. A few ministers, here 
and there, still cling to it. But the great majority know 
it only from books, as a thing of the past. Multitudes 
of people, regular attendants on the sanctuary, cannot 
remember ever to have heard it from the pulpit. But 
though obsolete in New England, it is dominant through- 
out Evangelical Christendom, except where the new di- 
vinity has penetrated. All the creeds and formulas of the 
Reformation have it, — all the Protestant churches of the 
Old World. And it yet stands uncondemned in the 
creeds of the Presbyterian and Congregational churches, 
both Old School and New. The difference is, in the Old 
School it is believed and taught; in the New, it is sup- 
planted by a new theory, hereafter to be considered. 

Let any one read the sermons of Spurgeon, or Dr. 
Spring's Attractions of the Cross, or the Sermons on Sac- 
ramental Occasions by Dr. Spencer, if he would see this 
theory in living exercise urged home with vital force and 
energy. Nor can a true Christian, who heartily loves the 
Saviour, read or hear such discourses, even though he 
reject the theory in the strict literal sense, without interest 
and profit ; for imperfect as the view may be deemed as a 
philosophical theory in the literal sense of the term, it 
readily yields, by the law of analogy, a figurative sense 
that is of the very marrow of the Gospel. 

In all that has been exhibited as the doctrine of atone- 
ment, the theory is one thing, the facts of Christ's personal 
history another. The theory is in few words, — Punish- 
ment cannot be remitted, therefore Christ took it in our 



22 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

stead. The facts are what we find them on the surface 
of the Gospel, what we see with our mind's eye in the 
life, sufferings, and death of Jesus. Nothing is easier 
than this distinction between the theory and the facts of 
history. And nothing can be more plain that it is not 
the theory, but the facts, in which the chief power over 
the heart resides. Is it essential to salvation to believe 
this theory in its strict literal sense ? Must we believe it 
or perish ? Then the Church for a thousand years is lost. 
Then the churches of New England, since the days of Ed- 
wards, are lost. It is not essential. It cannot be. It is 
not the theory literally taken that affects the heart. It is 
not in the theory that love begins. On the contrary, love 
is awakened by the sight of the facts, the sight of Jesus, 
his loveliness, his sorrows, his strange sufferings, and the 
knowledge that those sufferings were for us, a thing we 
believe on God's word, without knowing how. This 
awakens love. And the moment we attempt to analyze, 
and penetrate to the theory of satisfaction to justice, that 
moment the mind is troubled, the feelings are cooled, and 
the power of the cross begins to diminish. 

Therefore it is not a belief of this theory, any more 
than it was of the ancient, that saves the soul. On the 
ancient theory Christ suffered most wonderfully, most 
mysteriously. On this modern theory he did no more, no 
less. And one theory is just as good as the other, so far 
as power over the heart is concerned, because neither has 
one grain of power which it does not borrow from the 
facts, from Christ seen a sufferer for man. It may, indeed, 
be urged in favor of the modern theory, as compared with 
the ancient, that the suffering is greater. There it was 
Satan, a creature, from whom the suffering proceeded. 
Here it is no creature, but the Almighty himself that 
smites. By some mysterious transfer, some ineffable im- 
putation, the sufferer acquires the power of feeling the 



SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 23 

guilt, the despair, the horrible agony of the lost under 
the living wrath of the Omnipotent. 

But although this language is used, the import is quickly 
modified by statements that God was not really displeased 
with him ; that he did not really suffer remorse ; that it 
was not the identical suffering of the lost. This leaves us 
about where we were before, with the facts of the record, 
the sufferings visible to the eye ; and as to those deeper, 
more mysterious, we know no more on the modern than 
we did upon the ancient theory. 

We observe, in passing, that the defenders of this theory 
seem to admit what in other connections they usually de- 
ny, namely, that God is bound by the principles of honor 
and right. It is only in virtue of his justice that " he has 
a right to sit on the eternal throne." They affirm, cate- 
gorically, that " God is inexorably obligated to do justly." 
To remit penalty in a single case would be " unprincipled," 
"unbridled," "arbitrary." To fail in executing the en- 
tire penalty of sin, would be " outraging his own law," 
"inflicting a wound on that holy judicial nature," and 
"doing damage to one whole side of his Godhead." 

Not to punish fully every sin that ever was committed, 
would be " unholy," " inglorious," " unjust." It would 
be "mere arbitrary will and might striding forward to 
reach its own private ends, and trampling down justice 
by sheer force." They say God " cannot " do this. 
They say he must not. " Whatever else God may be, 
or may not be, he must be just." x In every conceivable 
way, and with astonishing intrepidity, writers of this class 
assert the doctrine that God is responsible to the princi- 
ples of justice, which are the principles of honor and right. 
It is important to bear this in mind, when we come to dis- 
cuss presently the subject of the fall in Adam. 

Suffer me, then, once more to set forth visibly be- 
1 Prof. Shedd, Bibliotheca Sacra, Oct., 1859. 



24 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

fore you Jesus the Crucified, as your suffering Saviour. 
I ask you not at present to believe a theory or to dis- 
believe one, but simply to look at an object, — an object 
of sight. How often do the Scriptures set forth the man- 
ner of receiving benefit in this way : " Looking unto 
Jesus, the author and finisher of faith." " Look unto 
me and be ye saved." 

When Moses raised up the brazen serpent in the wil- 
derness, as many as looked were healed. And of the 
future conversion of Israel it is written, " They shall look 
upon Him whom they have pierced, and mourn." The 
idea seems to be that Jesus is such an object, such in 
his beauty, loveliness, and compassion, such in his suffer- 
ings, that the very sight is calculated to produce a deep 
effect, especially if we not merely glance, but look stead- 
fastly, look with fastened attention, with all the inquiring 
powers of our soul awakened. If we look, saying in- 
wardly, " It was for me ! I know not how ; but it was 
because I was guilty and lost. He loved me, he dies 
for my salvation" ; — in this way, the effect on the heart 
comes, if it come at all. Will you, then, thus look ? 
Will you thus fasten the eye of the mind on Jesus ? 
You cannot do it without being impressed. There is a 
mystery of sorrow there that you feel, although — nay, I 
had almost said because — you cannot fully understand its 
nature nor measure its dimensions. You see at least that 
it is the greatest sorrow that ever was known, and that it 
is for you. 

" I saw One hanging on the tree 

In agony and blood, 
Who fixed his languid eyes on me 

As near the cross I stood." 

That Sufferer has looked in the face of human sorrow and 
wept. His face is more marred than the face of any man. 
You cannot measure his sorrow, for it is divine ; but can 



SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 25 

you not see that he has measured yours, — that in that 
infinite sympathy -your every woe is repeated, as the stars 
are repeated on the bosom of the waveless sea ? 

You can never know by words merely what the enigma 
of the cross contains, but only by looking on His face. 
Look with an eye fascinated by his, as Peter looked and 
wept bitterly. Look at him, living, journeying, toiling, 
praying, hungering, insulted, pierced, bleeding, dying, — 
and shuddering cry: 

" Is this the Infinite ? 'T is He, 
My Saviour and my God ! " 

And through the eye, through the channels of the inner 
sense, you will receive impressions inexplicable, unutter- 
able, transforming you to a child of God. You will look 
on Him whom you have pierced and mourn for Him. 



CHAPTER III. 

ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 
" The soul that sinneth, it shall die." — Ezek. xviii. 20. 

THE chapter from which these words are taken seems to 
oppose the idea that punishment can be inflicted on 
one person for another. The principle seems to be dis- 
tinctly laid down as fundamental to the Divine administra- 
tion, that only the sinner can be punished for his sin. It 
is for this reason the passage is selected, when we are 
about to exhibit the overthrow of the scholastic theory 
of atonement by the logic of the New England divines. 
The earliest attack on this theory is that of Socinus in the 
sixteenth century. Among other objections were the two 
following : — 

1. The satisfaction of justice by proxy is impossible in 
the nature of things. They who assert this doctrine "rep- 
resent God as attempting things in their very nature 
wholly impracticable." 

2. If it were possible, there would be no grace in for- 
giveness. " The mercy of God does not appear when no 
liberality ^ is perceived in him, and when he satisfies his 

severity in the fullest punishment of sin The idea 

that both justice and mercy are exhibited in salvation is 
plainly ridiculous, and can by no means be established; 
for mercy demands that the sinner be freely forgiven, but 
justice demands that those who have sinned be punished. 
.... Nay, verily Christ did not suffer eternal death, and 
woe be to us if he had ! " 

Grotius, of the seventeenth century, attempting to de- 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 27 

fend the doctrine, in reality gave up its fundamental prin- 
ciple, and in a measure anticipated the New England 
theory, though he did not fully elaborate and defend it. 
His defence, therefore, availed nothing, and produced little 
effect. Men continued either to hold the scholastic doc- 
trine, or became Socinians. 

It was not until after President Edwards's day that the 
new theory, of which the germs were found in Grotius, 
was fully elaborated and enabled to take the place of the 
old, so that a man might reject it without falling into 
Socinianism. 

The method with this new theory, commonly called the 
New England or Governmental theory, is first to attack 
and demolish the old, employing the above-mentioned 
arguments urged by Socinus, together with a third fur- 
nished by the Universalists. Having demolished the old 
theory in this way, they proceed to establish another in 
its place, as I shall show at the proper time. At present 
let us consider the attack upon the scholastic theory. 

1. Satisfaction of justice by substitution impossible'. 

" Distributive justice," says the younger Edwards, " has 
no respect to the character of a third person." " Our ill 
desert," says Smalley, " is not taken away by the atone- 
ment of Christ : that can never be taken away." " Merit 
is ever personal ; in the nature of things it cannot be oth- 
erwise." 

Emmons says : Christ " never transgressed the law, and 
so the law could not threaten any punishment to him. 
His sufferings were no punishment, much less our punish- 
ment." 

Dr. Griffin says : " Christ could not sustain our legal 
punishment If the law had said that we or a sub- 
stitute should die, this might be, but it said no such thing. 
The law is before us, and we see with our eyes that it con- 
tains no such clause." 



28 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

" God's justice," says Dr. Fiske, " demands, not pun- 
ishment in general, but the precise punishment which 
the sin ... . deserves. And inflicted, .... not on any- 
body at random, but on the identical sinner." 

" To say that a substituted or vicarious punishment can 
satisfy this demand of Divine wrath, is to say that that 
wrath can be satisfied with something which it does not 
imperatively demand, i. e. that it does not imperatively 
demand the punishment of the sinner." 

" It is said that punishment is the correlate to guilt, just 
as a liquid is the correlate to thirst. But is the liquid 
drank by one person a correlate to the thirst of another 
person ? " * 

Albert Barnes declares : " This cannot be ; men cannot 
be required to believe it. Those who affirm this have 
either no clear idea of what they profess to believe, 
or else use language without any definite signification." 
" The proper penalty of the law could be borne by the 
offender only, and could not be transferred to another." 

Such is the nature of the first objection against the 
theory of substituted punishment. Under its pressure 
there is apparent a breaking down of the theory in the 
hands of those that hold it. 

" Did Christ," we ask, " experience remorse ? " No, 
they reply, that was not essential to the penalty. " Did 
he, then, bear the wrath of God ? Was God properly dis- 
pleased with' him ? " They confess that this was not the 
case, although God inflicted on him all the marks and 
tokens of indignation. " Did he, then, suffer eternal 
death ? " No, they reply, that was not the essential pen- 
alty of the law. " Did he, then, in any manner suffer an 
infinite penalty ? Were his pains infinite ? " They an- 
swer in the negative. It was his human nature alone that 
suffered, or could suffer. It was not necessary there should 
1 Bibliotheca Sacra, April, 1861. 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 29 

be infinite pains. " Did Christ, then," we ask, " suffer 
the identical punishment due to our sins ? " No, it is said, 
he suffered a strict equivalent. 

Thus, under pressure, the theory crumbles down. First, 
substitute one person for another; next, one penalty for 
another ; then eliminate from that penalty all that makes it 
real, namely, the living indignation of God revealed to the 
guilty consciousness ; and how much is left of that theory, 
at first so strict, that dared to say that not even in hell was 
vindictive justice so illustriously satisfied as upon Calvary ? 
Consequently it is presently said that the theory is above 
reason ; we must not question, but bow and adore ; it is 
not only above, but against reason. " We cannot tell you," 
says Dr. Spring, " how it is that a God of justice and 
holiness can, consistently with those attributes, inflict pun- 
ishment upon the infinite Saviour. We know that he does 
so." " It is above the light of nature, and either the in- 
vention or the capacity of reason," says Mr. Bradbury. 
" Reason can neither contrive nor receive it." 

2. The second objection is no less conclusive. It is this. 
A literal satisfaction of justice renders pardon a matter of 
debt, not of grace. 

It is from this point that the younger Edwards com- 
mences his discussion of the subject. This has ever 
been, he frankly confesses, one of the Gordian knots in 
theology to him. And how, then, does he loose the Gor- 
dian knot ? We reply, he cuts it, by declaring that 
Christ did not satisfy justice in any proper sense of that 
term. Justice, he explains, is either commutative, as 
relating to property, or distributive, as concerned with 
personal character, or general, as respecting the public 
welfare. The latter, he says, is improperly called jus- 
tice, being identical with benevolence. Yet "it is only 
the third kind of justice which is satisfied by the death 
of Christ." That is to say, the death of Christ satisfies 



30 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

only that kind of justice which is improperly called jus- 
tice ; i. e. it does not satisfy justice properly so called 
at all. If it did, he says, " there would be no more 
grace in the discharge of the sinner, than in the dis- 
charge of the criminal when he has endured the full 
penalty of the law." Says Dr. Griffin : " The idea of 
paying our debt .... stands diametrically opposed to 
every idea of pardon." "Pardon or forgiveness in its 
very nature implies grace. It is impossible to forgive in 
any other way. Pardon on the ground of justice would 
be a contradiction in terms." 

" How can God," asks Dr. Fiske, " who has already 
exacted punishment for sin to his entire satisfaction, be 
said to forgive it?" The only answer attempted to 
this is thus given by Dr. Hodge : " What is salvation 
by grace, if it be not that God of his own good pleasure 
provided redemption?" That is, God, not the sinner, 
provides the substitute, and therefore to the sinner it is 
of grace. 

The reply is twofold. God cannot punish twice for the 
the same offence. If he has actually punished sin once, 
he cannot do it again, but must release the sinner ; that 
release, then, is of debt, not of grace. 

Again, if all the mercy there is lies before the atone- 
ment, as its logical antecedent and procuring cause, not 
its consequent and effect, then it follows that. God showed 
mercy in order to be able to punish. It also follows that 
mercy can be shown without an atonement. If all the 
mercy that is shown was shown in providing the atone- 
ment, then it was the cause of that atonement, not its 
effect ; it cannot be both cause and effect, cannot precede 
and follow. But if it was cause, it preceded the atone- 
ment ; if it went before, it was without it ; and therefore 
every word that has been written to the effect that God 
cannot show mercy without an atonement, is here recanted 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 31 

and obliterated. The only forgiveness possible, according 
to this, is without an atonement, previous to it, and the 
ground of its existence. 

3. The third objection to the theory in question is, 
that it logically leads either to a limited atonement or 
to Universalism. 

"According to the common notion," says Smalley, 
" of a literal satisfaction, this argument of the Univer- 
salists would be exceedingly plausible ; to me it appears 
it would be absolutely unanswerable. Thus : God is 
obliged in justice to save men as far as the merit of 
Christ extends ; but the merit of Christ is sufficient for 
the salvation of all men ; therefore God is obliged in 
justice to save all." To this it is clear the only answer 
possible is, that the atonement was not made for all, 
but for the elect only. 

" It follows inevitably," says Dr. Fiske, " that, if Christ 

literally satisfied distributive justice for all men, 

all men will be saved." The only escape is, he satisfied 
justice only for the elect. 

Accordingly, Professor Park observes : " It is an in- 
structive fact, that Drs. West, Edwards, and Smalley pub- 
lished their views of the atonement within one and the 
same twelvemonth, 1785-6. That was the period when 
the irruption of Universalism into New England had as- 
sumed a peculiarly alarming aspect. The advocates of 
Universalism derived some of their most plausible argu- 
ments in favor of it from the old Calvinistic theory of the 
atonement, as a literal infliction of the legal penalty, and 
a literal satisfaction of vindictive justice. There was no 
way of refuting these arguments without resorting to 
the unamiable and unscriptural notion, that the atone- 
ment was designed for the elect only ; or else resorting 
to a more Biblical theory than had prevailed respecting 
the very nature of the atonement itself." 



32 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

We have now completed our survey of the chief objec- 
tions urged by the New England divines against the scho- 
lastic theory. That theory is, however, like the ancient, 
liable to another objection. It has been remarked, that 
the ancient theory was marred by the element of decep- 
tion involved. The Deity was represented as actually 
deceiving Satan, and thus vanquishing him with his own 
weapons. Now, though the modern theory has nothing 
of deception in this gross form, it is infected with a more 
latent contagion. 

Thus it is affirmed, in the strongest language, that 
Christ suffered the wrath of God. If so, God must 
have been really displeased with him. The penalty of 
the law consists not merely in the outward stroke, but 
in that living indignation of God which that stroke 
reveals. But it is conceded that God was not really 
angry with him. Hence it amounts to this : God in- 
flicted all the marks and tokens of a displeasure which 
he did not feel. Thus God is represented as making 
believe punish, as pretending to be angry, as acting a 
part contrary to his real feelings. 

Again, the penalty of sin, it is said, is infinite ; there- 
fore only an infinite Redeemer could make atonement. 
Christ's satisfaction contains the element of infinitude, 
" which is the element of value in the case." Yet, in 
the same breath almost, it is affirmed that the Divine 
nature cannot suffer. It was alone the human nature 
which suffered. How, then, does the satisfaction contain 
the element of infinitude ? 

The insincerity involved in such a mode of speaking 
as this, its want of genuineness, must strike every one 
who will reflect candidly upon it. Add to this, that the 
theory in question obliges us to look at Christ's trial 
and execution as just, and yet unjust at the same time. 
The sufferings and death of Christ were a just punish- 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 33 

ment. It was an eminent exercise of God's immaculate 
justice. But yet the Gospel narrative is particular to 
show that his trial was an outrage, — the testimony that 
of false witnesses, discrepant, irrelevant, the sentence ille- 
gal, the whole proceeding a mock-trial, destitute even 
of a fair show of justice. How can the same process 
be at once the most unjust and cruel mockery that 
ever happened, and yet the most eminent exhibition 
of Divine justice ? Is God in league with Satan against 
the sacred sufferer ? Does Divine justice conspire with 
the brutal injustice of the Sanhedrim ? How can immac- 
ulate and heavenly justice be satisfied by a proceeding 
flagrant in every part with falsehood and cruel wrong ? 
The idea is too shocking to be dwelt upon. And it is 
deeply to be deplored, that in these ways the scholastic 
theory, even more painfully than the ancient, should in- 
vest the atonement with characteristics deceptive and 
unreal. 

On the whole, therefore, after surveying the whole 
ground, it must be conceded that the attack made upon 
the scholastic theory is logical and unanswerable. Nor 
can we hesitate to say, with Albert Barnes : " It cannot 
be ! Men cannot be required to believe it. Its defenders 
have either no clear idea of what they profess to believe, 
or use language without any definite signification." 

It may be remarked here, that it is frequently charged 
upon the New England divinity, that, in rejecting the old 
theory of atonement, it is on the high road to Socinianism. 
What gives color to this charge is, that two of the main 
objections were furnished by Socinus, and are still urged 
by his followers. Thus, Dr. Channing remarks : " How 
plain is it that, according to this doctrine, God never 
forgives ; for it seems absurd to speak of men as for- 
given, when their whole punishment, or an equivalent 
to it, is borne by a substitute." 

2* o 



34 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Now, when the defenders of the old theory find them- 
selves assailed with the same objections by the New Eng- 
land divines and the Socinians, the temptation is strong to 
confound the two. 

Yielding to this impulse, the Princeton Review asserts 
that the New England divinity, on this particular point, 
" has done more to corrupt religion, promote Socinianism, 
than any other of the vaunted improvements of American 
theology/' 

But it would be just as logical to call Calvin, and all the 
Reformers, Socinians, because they and Socinus used the 
same arguments against some other Catholic doctrines, 
which they rejected in common. The difference be- 
tween Socinus and the New England divines is this, — 
the former demolished the old theory, but put nothing 
in its place ; while the latter, finding the old theory un- 
tenable, abandoned it, and constructed a better, which 
should be, they thought, impregnable. They were like 
soldiers in an advanced and exposed post attacked by the 
enemy's artillery. Finding their defences beaten down, 
they retire to another fortification better situated and capa- 
ble of being strengthened till it is impregnable. Is that 
surrender ? Because they admit that the enemy's guns 
struck their breastwork at every shot, are they disloyal ? 
Because they abandon the shattered outwork for a posi- 
tion impregnable, are they in league with the foe ? Now 
Socinus was the foe. He cannonaded the old theory 
till it was a ruin. It was a total logical demolition. The 
New England divines, abandoning the wreck, betook them- 
selves to another which his guns could not batter down. 
Therefore, when this church, in common with the churches 
of .New England, is denounced as unsound, — when Dr. 
Beman, Dr. Cox, Albert Barnes, and the New England 
ministry generally, are accused of tendencies to Socini- 
anism, I earnestly repel the charge. And it will be my 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 35 

object, in another discourse, to show what that new theory 
is that was substituted by the New England engineers in 
place of that dilapidated work that sunk under the enemy's 
fire. 

I have frequently insisted that a belief in the correct 
theory of atonement could not be essential to salvation. 
This position may have seemed strange to some. It is 
with pleasure, therefore, that I find the same ground 
taken by the Princeton divines. Even while expressing, 
in terms stronger, perhaps, than good taste will allow, 
their condemnation of the New England theory, they 
confess that its defenders are good men. 

" There is more saving truth," says Dr. Hodge, " in 
the parings of our doctrine, than in their whole theory. 
.... Their theory is the most jejune, restricted, mea- 
gre, and lifeless that has ever been propounded 

It vitiates the essential nature of the atonement, makes 
it a mere governmental display, a symbolical method of 
instruction. This is a doctrine which we see not how a 
man can practically believe, and be a Christian. We do 
not believe there is truth enough in this theory to sustain 
the life of religion in any man's heart. We have no 
idea that Dr. Beman, Dr. Cox, or any good man, really 
lives by it. The truth, as it is practically embraced and 
appropriated by the soul, under the influence of the Holy 
Spirit, is the truth as it is in the Bible, and not as pre- 
sented in abstract propositions. It is, therefore, very possi- 
ble for a man to adopt theoretically such an abstract state- 
ment of Scripture doctrine as really denies its nature and 
destroys its power, and yet that man may receive the 
truth for his own salvation as it is revealed in the Bible." 

I give this statement, not as sympathizing in his extreme 
censure of the New England theory of atonement, but for 
the sake of the admirable statement with which it closes. 
The distinguished author was in a measure forced to this 



36 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

result. He must either say that all New England, since 
Edwards's time, was eternally lost, or take the ground that 
a belief in what he deems the correct theory is not abso- 
lutely essential to salvation. He chose the latter, and has 
stated it with great force and perspicuity. 

And if that principle had been always borne in mind, 
and applied consistently, brotherly love would have es- 
caped many a wound and the visible Church many a 
schism. 

Therefore, suffer me, at the risk of some repetition, to 
say, it is not the philosophy of salvation which effects 
salvation, it is not the theory of my Redeemer's work 
that moves me, but my Redeemer ; not the machinery 
put in motion by his love, but his love itself. Was his 
love great enough to induce him to invade the gloomy 
realm of Hades, and crush its adamantine barriers, I 
love him for a love so great. 

If his love impelled him to sustain Almighty wrath, 
supposing that to be possible, in my stead, I should love 
him for the greatness of that love. Or if his love led him 
to suffer in unknown and mysterious ways, as I find partly 
described and partly hinted at in the Gospel story, I love 
him for all that I see and all I can conjecture of that 
amazing love. 

If my theory compels me to think his sufferings human 
only and finite, still it was love that impelled him to en- 
dure what finite nature could. If I am at liberty to think 
he suffered also Divinely, it is still love that prompts the 
infinite sacrifice, and, in either case, " I love him because 
he first loved me." It is not because the necessity was 
of such or such a nature, but because it was necessity ; 
not because his death removed the obstacle in this way or 
that, but because it removed it; — because his love, sincere 
and devoted, met the emergency with a self-sacrifice ab- 
solute and unconditional and effectual. This, when I 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 37 

know the fact, makes me love him, if I am yet capable of 
loving. This saves the soul, if it be capable of salvation, 
by awaking it to sentiments of true, honorable, and fer- 
vent love, and ingenuous regret for the past. 

For if those sorrows were necessary on account of my 
sins, then my sins inflicted them. If that strange baptism 
of agony was rendered indispensable by my alienation and 
hardness of heart, then it was I who platted that crown 
of thorns, my hand drove the nail, my guilty arm thrust the 
spear. I did whatever my necessities did ; and if a true, 
unselfish, honorable sorrow for sin be possible to my soul, 
it is when I see this, and grieve that I cost him so dear, 
when I look on him whom I pierced, and mourn for him. 

The story of Calvary is so told as to produce the right 
impression, and, when accompanied by Divine grace, no 
heart not reprobate can resist. It softened Africaner's 
breast, — a man who had spent his life in blood and 
ferocity, a man incapable of theory, a man unprepared 
for speculation ; — the sight of Calvary, the story of Christ 
crucified for him, melted his heart. Far be it from me to 
say a word unkindly of those to whom the theory of strict 
satisfaction is dear. I can love them with most ardent 
fraternal affection, knowing how true and tender is their 
love to Jesus. But they love him not more truly than 
did the Fathers, with a theory widely different, than do the 
New England churches, with still another, or Africaner, 
with no theory at all. 

O the love of Jesus ! that wonderful thing ! I have 
seen it conquer even theological enmity, and utterly sub- 
due its proverbial rancor ! What a sweet, delightful, glo- 
rious reality ! I can breathe it, as a genuine air of Heaven, 
when I mix with brethren whose philosophy I disavow, 
whose theories appear to me the height of paradox. Su- 
preme over all, distinct from everything else, I can feel 
the love of a common Lord melting our hearts, and fusing 



68 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

them in one ! Such society is inexpressibly dear. We 
sacrifice not a principle ; we surrender not a doctrine. 
The lines of system are drawn distinct and clear, and 
contended for with earnestness. But Jesus stills each 
heart, and softens every eye, and hushes every tongue. 
A chastened, subdued air is diffused around, — an air of 
love. All evil is quelled and overmastered. We have 
seen Jesus ! Love, like an infinite deep, absorbs us. 
O with such it is sweet to commune ! We can agree or 
disagree without pain, because we can pray and sing and 
adore with full accord. 

If, indeed, we could with angels look into these things, 
love might be mightier. Far be it from me to undervalue a 
true and profound and comprehensive theory. It is the 
wisdom of God as well as the power of God. If we could 
go on to perfection, searching the deep things of God, 
love would grow mature, manly, robust. We should 
take fire. We should burn and glow like the seraphs. 
Therefore is it that I approach the study of the theory 
in its higher aspects. I would fain endeavor to lead you, 
brethren, who already love, nearer into the focal fire. I 
would, Divine grace assisting, bring you as far as possible 
on your way to the unveiled sight of God. 

But I cannot forget the babes in Christ, nor the lambs 
of the flock, just coming toward the fold, nor the timorous 
and trembling ones, of whom it may be said, " Thou art 
not far from the kingdom of Heaven." I cannot say to 
such : I am going up to the Mount of Transfiguration ; — 
ascend, or perish ! I am about to explore the arcana of the 
universe, to solve the mystery midway of two eternities ; 
— achieve the full solution of the theme, or die forever ! 
God forbid ! To such I say : Behold the Lamb of God. 
Look at yonder Man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. 
He is your friend. Look at him on that cross. He dies 
from love to you. Look at him crowned now at the right 



ATTACK ON THE SCHOLASTIC THEORY. 39 

hand. He is crowned for you, and carries the same heart 
towards you he carried in Gethsemane. Are you sick 
and suffering? He bore that, and bears it still. Are 
you sensible of the stain sin has sunk deep into you ? He 
bore that sin on the tree, and bears it in his sympathizing 
heart to-day. Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and 
forever. Do you feel sad, depressed, guilty, undone ? 
Listen ! That infinite heart of love that went down to 
Calvary is touched with the feeling of your infirmity. 
He bears you, O believe it ! on his heart, because he loves 
you. Get but a sight of that fact. Know that he loves 
you. Be convinced that that ineffable tenderness is rest- 
ing on you, and you cannot despair. Hope, gratitude, 
love, must kindle all your soul. And, believing in him, 
you shall then proceed, just as fast as you are able, to 
explore the higher truths of that redeeming grace. Love 
first. Believe and live. And then pray, with all saints, 
to comprehend the breadth and length and depth and 
height, and to know the love of God that passeth knowl- 
edge. 



CHAPTER IV. 

NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 

" TO DECLARE HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS." — Rom. ill. 25, 26. 

IN this passage we have the best enunciation of the 
fundamental principle of the New England theory of 
atonement. The object of setting forth Christ a pro- 
pitiatory sacrifice is here distinctly stated, — "To declare 
God's righteousness for the remission of sins ; that God 
might be just, and yet justify him that believeth." 

The cross was set up to convince the intelligent uni- 
verse of the spotless righteousness of God in the final 
issues of punishment and of pardon. Hence, contrasting the 
two, — the Scholastic and the New England views, — we 
may say concisely, In the one the cross was a punishment, 
in the other it is an argument. It is an argument ad- 
dressed by the Creator to the mind of all finite creatures 
throughout the universe, good and bad, in all ages. 

In developing this theory, I shall, as in case of the pre- 
ceding, employ the language of its authors and defenders. 
Edwards the younger thus states the matter : " That is 
done by the death of Christ which supports the authority 
of the law, and renders it consistent with the glory of God 
and the good of the whole system to pardon the sinner." 

Here observe, that, whenever these writers speak of 
supporting the authority of the law, they point to an effect 
on the mind of those subject to law. It is only in the 
minds of the subjects of law that its honor and authority 
can be said to be weakened or supported. If subjects 
lose all fear and reverence, then the law is said to be 



NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 41 

weakened ; if they are obedient and conscientious, the law 
is honored and supported. None of these writers would 
for a moment intimate that the law itself is arbitrary, de- 
pendent on the will of God, or capable of being repealed. 
On the contrary, they regard it as coeternal with God, 
and as unalterable as the Divine nature itself. Hence, 
when they speak of weakening or strengthening it, they 
can only mean weakening or strengthening the creature's 
respect for it. To honor it, or dishonor it, can only imply 
to excite respect or disrespect in the creature mind. And 
all terms of this description are to be thus interpreted. 

" The atonement, then," continues Edwards, " was ne- 
cessary to support the authority of the Divine law, and the 
honor, vigor, and even existence of the Divine moral gov- 
ernment, while sinners are pardoned." " On every hy- 
pothesis concerning the mode or condition of pardon, it 
must be allowed that God dispenses pardon from regard 
to some circumstance, or juncture of circumstances, which 
renders the pardon both consistent with the general good 
and subservient to it." 

The language of Smalley is very similar to that of Ed- 
wards. The object of the atonement, he says, is, " that 
the honor of the Divine law and government be main- 
tained, though sinners be pardoned " ; and that the for- 
giveness of sin " may not bring the eternal law of right- 
eousness and eternal Lawgiver of the universe into 
disregard and contempt." 

" God's own glory and the good of the moral creation 
required that there should be such a law, and that the 
dignity of it should be supported. A lawless, licentious 
universe were infinitely worse than none." Forgiveness 
may be granted to the penitent only " provided it may 
be done consistently with justice, and without doing hurt, 
upon the whole." 

" But the letter of a law may possibly be deviated from, 



42 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

and yet the spirit of it be supported and the design of it 
fully obtained. We are told of a certain ancient King 
Zaleuchus, who .... enacted a law that the adulterer 
should be punished with the loss of both his eyes. His 
own son was convicted of the crime. The royal father, 
.... who could not bear to have one so dear to him de- 
prived forever of the light of day, devised an expedient to 
soften, in that one instance, the rigor of his law, and yet 
not abate its force in future. The king, in a most public 
manner, before all the people, had one of his own eyes 

plucked out, so that one of his son's might be saved 

By this means the king's inflexible determination to main- 
tain government and punish transgression was even more 
strikingly evinced than if he had suffered the law to have 
its natural course." So " we are to conceive of the re- 
demption of Christ as an astonishing expedient of infinite 
wisdom and goodness, that we might be saved, and yet 
God be just, and his righteous law suffer no dishonor." 

" Atonement," says Maxcy, " implies the necessity of 
sufferings, merely as a medium through which God's real 
disposition toward sin should be seen in such a way that 
an exercise of pardon should not interfere with the dignity 
of government and the authority of law." 

" Christ's sufferino-s rendered it right and fit, with 
respect to God's character and the good of the universe, 
to forgive sin ; it presented the law, the nature of sin, and 
the displeasure of God against it, in such a light, that no 
injury would accrue to the moral system, no imputation 
lie against the righteousness of the great Lawgiver, though 

he should forgive The death of Christ, therefore, is 

to be considered a great, important, and public transaction 
respecting Grod and the whole system of rational beings." 

Says Dr. Emmons : " His dying .... answered the same 
purpose that God would have answered by executing the 
penalty of the law It displayed the same feelings 



NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 43 

towards sinners that God would have displayed by pun- 
ishing the whole human race according to their desert 

God made it manifest that he feels the same hatred of 
sin and disposition to punish it when he forgives as when 
he punishes sinners." 

" The truth is, his obedience only prepared him to make 
atonement ; his blood made it, and atonement did neither 
satisfy nor merit. It only rendered it consistent for God 
to show mercy, to be just, and the justifier of all who 
believe." 

Dr. Griffin says : " The only end is the support of law, 
by showing God's determination to execute its penalty on 
transgressors. This was its precise and only end. This 
answered, it became an expression of amazing wisdom, • 
benevolence, and mercy." It gave " the Father an op- 
portunity to prove to the universe that he would execute 
his law on future transgressors." 

" The whole use, then, of the atonement .... was to 
show that God was determined to support his holy law by 
punishing sin." It was "to furnish practical proof" of 
this. " When that proof was given, .... the Protector 
of law was satisfied." Again, the atonement was " that 
which answered the end of punishment, by showing the 
universe that God would support his law." Its end was 
" to support law, by convincing the universe that God 
would punish transgression." The atonement was plainly 
" an expedient of a moral governor to support the moral 
law." God had no desire or demand " but for an op- 
eration upon public law for the benefit of the universe. 
Nothing could have the least influence to satisfy him but 
that operation upon public law.'''' 

Mr. Burge observes : " God cannot grant pardon to sin- 
ners, unless it can be done under such circumstances, and 
in such a way, as render it consistent with the highest in- 
terests of the great community." 



44 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

If God had pardoned without an atonement, he asks, 
" would not his character have appeared questionable in 
view of intelligent beings ? Would he not have given 
rational creatures reason to conclude, or at least suspect, 
that he .... was destitute of a disposition to support and 
vindicate a good law ? .... In this way, then, how could 
he declare his righteousness ? How could he appear just ? 
If, then, penalty should be remitted, something else must 
be done, which would manifest for the law as much re- 
spect as the complete execution of penalty." 

" Whatever evil God has submitted to on account of 
his law, must manifest his respect for it. If, then, the 
sufferings of Christ were really an evil in the sight of God, 
and he submitted to them on account of his law, then it is 
evident that they are sufficient to show his respect for 
his law." 

" This theory," says Dr. Fiske, " places the necessity 
of atonement in the exigencies of God's moral govern- 
ment The atonement was necessary in order to vin- 
dicate and sustain the Divine law, and thus enable God, as 
a wise and benevolent ruler, to remit the penalty due to sin." 

Mr. Barnes, also, observes : " The sufferings endured by 
the Redeemer, in the place of the sinner, are fitted to make 
a deeper impression on the universe at large than would 
be produced by the punishment of the sinner himself." 

This, briefly sketched, is the view of the New England 
churches. As it is expressed in the articles of belief of 
this church, the atonement has simply " opened a way by 
which pardon and salvation may be consistently offered 
to our guilty race." The characteristic principle of the 
theory resides in that word "consistently." Consistently 
with the Divine perfections and the general good. Indeed, 
the view is sometimes called the Consistent Theory, in 
allusion to this constantly recurring word. 

I have said, that, according to this theory, the atone- 



NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 45 

ment is an argument, a sublime and irresistible demon- 
stration. Hence, in the writers quoted, such expressions 
are habitually employed, as declaring, proving, establish- 
ing, manifesting, exhibiting, and the like. By it God 
vindicates, shows, causes to appear. By it, says Dr. 
Griffin, he " proved to the universe " ; he effected " an 
operation on public law." And Albert Barnes says 
that by it God intended to " make a deep impression on 
the universe at large." Phraseology of this import, of 
every variety, is used abundantly throughout the dis- 
cussion. 

God says to his creatures, finite though they be, " Come, 
let us reason together." He stoops to solicit their verdict 
of approval upon his administration. He constitutes them 
his judges, and pleads before their bar in defence of his 
righteousness, long impugned. So tender is he of the con- 
science of his creatures ! Such respect does he show to 
the laws of that finite reason he has made in likeness of 
his own eternal reason ! So mindful of their integrity ! 
He will not compel them slavishly to acquit him, to offer 
fulsome adulation, heartless flattery : their incense must 
be frankincense most precious, the fire in their censers 
not strange fire. They must not yield him the attribute 
of righteousness, unless they can see and feel it to be his ; 
and that they may so see and feel, how he lifts them 
up, ennobles, dignifies them ! O how he abases himself, 
humbles himself, even unto death ! 

In such a view as this there is something that appeals 
strongly to our better nature. 

From the cross, God appeals to our thoughtful, conscien- 
tious, and affectionate consideration, and really achieves 
the infinite task, to make the creature know his Creator, 
the finite appreciate the infinite, the sinful justify the im- 
maculate ! 

How infinite the disclosure of the Divine meekness and 



46 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

sweet humility ! How astonishing 
worth and grandeur of the soul ; of the value to the Father 
of his children made in his likeness, and thought of con- 
sequence sufficient to be thus treated by him ! 

This theory differs equally from the Scholastic doctrine 
of forgiveness, on the one hand, and the Socinian, on the 
other. The Scholastic position is, that forgiveness is wrong, 
and needs to be made right, — if, indeed, such a thing as 
forgiveness exists when penalty is never remitted. Hence 
it would seem to follow, that, if God is disposed to forgive- 
ness, he is disposed to do wrong, if, indeed, forgiveness be 
wrong. But this theory teaches that forgiveness is in 
itself comely and glorious, needing not to be made right. 
We contemplate forgiveness as the highest and most ador- 
able perfection of the Divine character. And to eternity, 
the redeemed will wonder that they have never known 
what the Almighty had cause to think and feel respect- 
ing their behavior. The blazing sword of that terrible 
disclosure remains sheathed in eternal repose. That 
is wonderful and beauteous to a soul that feels in some 
degree what God might say and do. Not, indeed, that 
repentance merits such forbearance, but that it makes 
it possible to the Divine discretion. It is not a wound to 
the Divine justice not to punish a penitent, as it would be 
not to punish an impenitent rebel. The pardon of a peni- 
tent, in itself considered, hurts not one fibre or filament 
of immaculate justice. 

Yet such pardon may be abused and perverted by the 
careless, the presumptuous, and especially the already 
revolted. Hence it must be guarded and made consistent 
and safe. Here we draw the line against the Socinian. 
When the Socinian says that forgiveness is right, and 
needs not to be made right, New England divines are 
not afraid to agree with him. Truth must be acknowl- 
edged, by whomsoever spoken. But when the Socinian 



NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 47 

says that forgiveness was also safe and consistent, so that 
no incarnation and death of the Eternal Word was neces- 
sary, then we draw the line, and stand in irreconcilable 
opposition. There was a necessity lying in the conditions 
and liabilities of the creature universe that rendered such 
a measure absolutely necessary. With it, redemption was 
possible ; without it, not. The incarnation and sacrifice 
of the God-man, therefore, constitute the central measure 
of the Divine administration. Thus this view is just as 
distinct from Socinianism on the one side as it is from the 
Scholastic doctrine on the other. 

A single observation, and I close. Even at this stage of 
the discussion there are elements of appeal to the believ- 
ing mind of peculiar delicacy and power. To discover 
one's self to have been highly valued by one so incon- 
ceivably great as God is itself a joyful surprise. We are 
prone to the philosophy that thinks the Almighty too vast 
to notice or care for such insects as we. But when the 
disclosure is made to us of his real thoughts on the cross, 
we find that he has valued us more highly than even his 
own dignity or immunity from inconvenience and suffer- 
ing. Again, the consciousness of being appreciated is 
grateful in the extreme ; the sense of being treated with 
consideration and delicacy, with profound deference to 
the principles of our intelligence, yea, with infinite re- 
spect to our intellectual freedom, our purity, our sincer- 
ity, so that God would not ask nor accept a praise that 
was not intelligent, sincere, and free, this is calculated to 
impart unspeakable delight. It diffuses an atmosphere of 
goodness and love about the soul as genial and exquisite 
as the gales of the tropics. 

As the amazing sweetness, generosity, and self-abnega- 
tion of the Eternal open upon us, we seem to be entering 
into the cloud, and wonder and transport contend for the 
mastery. And when it occurs to us that such qualities 



48 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

have been lavished upon us during our long period of 
ungrateful alienation, our hearts are broken, and the foun- 
tain of our tears opened. May the Eternal Spirit assist 
us to entertain these conceptions, and rise to their full 
and habitual reception. O may he cleanse us, that we 
may come near unto God ! And if there be those hearts 
here that have never known the softness of penitence, 
the sweet bitterness of sincere regret, may those hearts 
be touched by the finger of Divine grace ! O wander- 
ing ones, O guilty exiles, lost and wretched, listen to the 
voice of infinite compassion ! Hear the calls of a tender- 
ness infinite, a Saviour's love, which many waters cannot 
quench nor floods drown ! Come to Calvary, and adore 
and love ! Come weep before the cross. There may 
be mystery there, even as there was darkness over all 
the land unto the ninth hour. But it is a mystery of 
love. Kneel in the darkness, and let eternal day dawn 
in your soul. Let the drops of that blood, priceless 
above all worlds, fall ]ike balm on your guilty conscience, 
and seal you the Lord's in the bonds of an eternal 
covenant. 

" See, from his head, his hands, his feet, 

Sorrow and love flow mingled down ! 
Did e'er such love and sorrow meet, 

Or thorns compose so rich a crown ? " 



CHAPTER V. 

ATTACK ON THE NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 

"Nay but, man, who aet thou that eepliest against God?" — 

Eom. ix. 20. 

THE conception of the Divine Being most natural to 
minds educated under an absolute government is that 
of an absolute monarch. Accustomed from the dawn of be- 
ing to associate ideas of irresponsible authority with royal- 
ty, they unconsciously transfer a similar despotic character 
to God. To such minds, the idea of a Deity brought under 
any obligations to the creature is new, strange, and gener- 
ally distasteful. But with minds reared under the more 
genial influences of free government, the instinctive ten- 
dencies of thought are different. Naturally the mind 
delights to conceive of God as a constitutional sovereign, 
bound by the same laws and principles of right with his 
subjects. Such a mind rejoices to think, with Edwards, 
that " in God are the essential qualities of a moral agent, 
.... such as understanding to perceive the difference 
between moral good and evil, .... and a capability of 
choosing accordingly." And with Bellamy : " He sees 
what is right, and infinitely loves it because it is right ; 
he sees what is wrong, and infinitely hates it, because it is 
wrong." And to such a mind the absolutist conception 
of God is repellent. 

Thus there are two grand opposing systems of thought 
concerning God, the one of which teaches that things are 
right, because God wills them ; the other, that God wills 
them, because they are right. 

3 D 



50 KEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

From these opposite conceptions all other doctrines 
receive shape and coloring. The central subject of the 
atonement especially will be vitally influenced. For, on 
the absolutist principle, why should God seek to declare 
his righteousness, if a thing is right simply because he 
does it ? Its very existence declares it, and what can be 
the need of an infinite sacrifice for that end ? It is not 
strange, then, that a conception of the atonement based 
on the idea of declaring God's righteousness should be 
unwelcome to those whose philosophy is, that whatever 
God does is right, because he does it ; not that he does 
it because it is right. It is natural that such should feel 
the strongest objections to such a view of the atonement. 
Some of those objections against the New England theory 
I have already obviated, as, for example, its alleged So- 
cinian tendencies. Others remain for present considera- 
tion. And 

1. It is said that this theory " denies that sin, for its 
own sake, deserves punishment, and everywhere repre- 
sents the prevention of crime as the great end to be an- 
swered by punishment." 

Some may have erred in this way, but not all. It is 
not necessary to the theory. " God," observes Dr. Fiske, 
" must hate sin with a double hatred, — hate it on account 
of its intrinsic hatefulness, and on account of its evil 
tendencies." The real point made by the theory is, 
that God is not obliged to express his hatred of sin 
in the form of punishment. It is not true, then, that 
the view in question bases punishment on expediency 
alone. It simply affirms that, although sin intrinsically 
deserves punishment, yet the forgiveness of the penitent 
is not in itself wrong. 

2. But it is objected, again, that " this theory is desti- 
tute of any semblance of support from Scripture." 

But in Romans iii. 25, 26, there seems to be contained 



ATTACK ON THE NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 51 

a most explicit enunciation of it. "Him hath God set 
forth .... to declare his righteousness." The object 
of Christ's death was to declare the righteousness of God, — 
to declare it to the universe. God was righteous, and will 
be, in punishment and in pardon. But his righteousness 
might be hid ; it might be doubted, disputed, absolutely 
denied. By the cross he displayed it clearly, removed 
doubts, obviated disputes, and silenced denial ; in a word, 
he so declared it as to carry the convictions of the moral 
universe with him forever. 

Parallel with this is the remarkable assertion, (Hebrews 
ix. 23,) that it was necessary that the heavens themselves 
be purified by the blood of Christ ; that is, that all celes- 
tial intelligences should see God's righteousness fully de- 
clared to them, — their minds be purged from ignorance or 
doubt. So, indirectly, Ephesians hi. 10, where the object 
of the mediatorial creation is distinctly said to be, " To 
make known to principalities and powers the manifold 
wisdom of God " ; — righteousness being virtually included 
in that manifold wisdom, because nothing unrighteous can 
be really wise. 

It will be easy hereafter to show that there is more than 
a semblance of support for this view, and that, on the 
contrary, it expands and deepens, and becomes the central, 
main channel of Scripture representation. 

But, continues the objector, this theory " hardly pur- 
ports to be anything more than a hypothesis on which, to 
reconcile what the Bible teaches with our ideas of a moral 
government ; it is a device to make the atonement ra- 
tional, to explain away the mystery which hangs over it, 
and make the whole august transaction perfectly intelligi- 
ble." But to this we reply, that if we are to have any 
theory at all, it must be either rational or irrational. 
Some theory we must have. By the very definition of 
the term it is impossible to have a theory which is neither 



52 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

rational nor irrational. It must either embrace all the 
facts, and philosophically account for them, or the reverse. 
In the one case, it is rational ; in the other, it is irrational. 
Does the reviewer mean to imply that his own theory is 
" a device to make the atonement" irrational? 

Now we frankly concede that the New England mind 
asks for a theory of atonement which, if not absolutely 
divested of mystery, shall at least be, on the whole, 
rational and reconcilable with the principles of moral gov- 
ernment. By the cross God seeks to declare his right- 
eousness to us, and we very properly seek to understand 
that declaration. He makes it the central measure of his 
administration, the highest disclosure of the principles of 
his moral government to rational creatures. We accept 
it as such, and cannot permit an irrational theory to usurp 
its place, nor one diametrically opposed to the principles 
of moral government. 

3. There is another objection, the most important of 
any yet urged. It is this. If this be allowed to be the 
object of the atonement, to declare God's righteousness, 
still the New England theory fails to explain how the 
death of Christ shows or declares anything of the kind. 

Says Dr. Hodge : " The atonement is an exhibition of 
God's purpose to maintain law and inflict penalty, and 
thus operate as a motive and restraint upon all intelligent 
beings, because it involves the execution of that penalty. It 
is this that gives it all its power. It would be no exhibi- 
tion of justice, if it were not an exercise of justice. It 
would not teach that the penalty of law must be inflicted, 
unless it was inflicted." 

Here the reviewer skilfully assails the advocates of the 
new theory with their own weapons. They have argued 
against the old theory, that punishment by proxy is impos- 
sible, that sufferings inflicted upon an innocent substi- 
tute are not the penalty which the law threatened; in 



ATTACK ON THE NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 53 

short, that they do not constitute an exercise of justice at 
all. Td be an exercise of justice, they must be inflicted 
upon the identical offender, and not upon his substitute. 

This same inexorable logic the reviewer now retorts 
upon his assailants. If vicarious sufferings are not an 
exercise of justice, how are they an exhibition of it ? If 
they are not punishment, how do they indicate God will 
punish? If they are not an execution of law's penalty, 
how do they prove God will execute law ? Does the 
not doing what the law threatens, and doing the exact 
opposite, show respect for the law ? How does it show 
it? or, rather, how does it not show the contrary? To 
these questions it is difficult for the advocates of the New 
England theory, at least at the present stage of develop- 
ment of that theory, to offer any conclusive answer. This 
objection was urged by Dr. Hodge, in a review of a little 
treatise on the atonement by Dr. Beman, twenty or twen- 
ty-five years ago ; but in vain have I searched the writings 
of the other side for a reply. Hence it behooves us to 
weigh the matter well. As candid men, we must allow 
to every argument all its real weight. Let us, then, ask, 
Does the infliction of suffering on Christ, which is yet not 
punishment, not the penalty of the law, show God's deter- 
mination to punish? Does it show respect for the law, 
or does it, as Dr. Baird affirms, 1 " constitute a signal 
proclamation of the dethroning of the law, and the pros- 
tration of its honor in the dust" ? 

Mr. Burge says : " Whatever evil God has submitted 
to on account of his law must manifest his respect for the 
law. If, then, the sufferings of Christ were really an evil 
in the sight of God, and he submitted to them on account 
of his law, then it is evident that they are sufficient to 
show his respect for the law." 

But to this it may be answered, that God did not 
1 Elohim Kevealed, p. 264. 



54 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

really submit to any evil, because this writer, and all the 
others on the same side, with one voice declare that God 
cannot suffer. He is infinitely impassible. To speak, 
then, of his submitting to an evil seems like a species of 
verbal dishonesty, a rhetorical trick ; there is no genuine 
reality in it. Therefore, such an argument ought to be 
laid aside by these writers. Nor, even if God could, 
and actually did, submit to evil, would it show respect 
for law, unless that evil was necessary by law. How can 
the enduring of unnecessary evil show respect to law ? 
We all see that, when the heathen cut and burn and 
torture their bodies in their religious rites, that suf- 
fering shows no respect to God. Why? Because God 
does not require it. If God required of the papist fastings 
and sackcloth and scourgings and penances of every kind, 
they would show respect to God ; but as it is, they show 
nothing of the kind. So if the law really demanded the 
suffering of Christ, as a part of its penalty, then the penal 
infliction would show respect for the law ; but not other- 
wise. 

I am aware that it might be said, that, though not neces- 
sary as a penalty, they might be necessary to support the 
law. There is more than one kind of necessity, it might 
be said. The sufferings of Christ might be indirectly 
necessary to maintain law, though not directly called for 
by the law as penalty. The fault with this reasoning, 
however, is, that it is reasoning in a circle. Thus, why 
do the sufferings of Christ support the law? Because, it 
is said, they were absolutely necessary. But why were 
they absolutely necessary ? Answer, In order to support 
the law. In a word, the sufferings of Christ were neces- 
sary, because they support the law ; and they support 
the law, because they were necessary. This is plainly 
absurd. 

If, then, we examine the usual illustrations employed 



ATTACK ON THE NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 55 

in support of this idea, we shall find something preca- 
rious about them. Take the favorite instance of Za- 
leuchus. The law threatened the criminal with the 
loss of both his eyes. The lawgiver spared one of the 
criminal's eyes, and put out one of his own. Thus, it is 
said, he showed respect for the law, even more than if he 
had literally executed it. But is that true ? Would any 
but abject Oriental slaves reason so ? There is a test in- 
fallible. There is one way of showing respect for law that 
never fails, and that is by its execution, — by not swerv- 
ing through parental feeling or partiality of any kind. 
It is related that, in the reign of Louis XV. of France, 
a prince of the blood royal committed robbery and murder 
in the streets of Paris. When on trial before Parliament, 
the court sent a deputation to his father to secure a pardon 
for him. 

" My Lords and Councillors," said Louis, " return to 
your chamber of justice, and promulgate your decree." 

" Consider, Sire," replied the President of the Parlia- 
ment, " that the unhappy prince has your Majesty's blood 
in his veins." 

" Yes," said the king, " but that blood has become 
impure. Justice demands it be shed. Nor will I spare 
my son for a crime I should condemn in the meanest of 
my subjects." 

The prince was accordingly executed on the scaffold, 
August 12, 1729. Is there any doubt in any mind that 
this did really show respect for law, and strengthen the 
majesty of justice ? And is it not evident that if a second 
son had happened to offend, and had been punished, the 
law would be strengthened still more ? And would not 
every repetition of the sublime act of justice add to the 
strength of the statute ? 

Every one sees that it would. But how would repe- 
tition operate in the case of Zaleuchus ? Suppose, the 



56 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

second time a son offended, the queen had consented to 
lose one eye for his sake ; the third time, an uncle or some 
noble, and so on. Is it not plain that each time the law 
was thus dealt with it would be weakened, and that finally 
it would be nullified entirely ? Does any one suppose 
that Zaleuchus showed respect for law as much as Louis 
XV. did? Is there not a radical difference of tendency 
in the two cases ? 

But how can a thing that really strengthens law weaken 
it by repetition ? It is not so with actual execution of 
penalty. How can it be so in the other case ? Is it not 
plain that there is no real respect shown for law ? that 
there is nothing genuine in it? that the father preferred 
the pain of losing an eye to the greater pain of losing a 
son, and chose the less of two pains ? And did he not 
thus barter the law for a diminution of his own pain ? and 
was it not personal and selfish ? 

Let us think what a subject of the two monarchs might 
say. " See," exclaims the Parisian, "we are safe : if the 
king would not pardon his own son, he would not pardon 
anybody ; therefore let all robbers and murderers beware." 
The whole of Paris, the whole of France, would feel 
firmer and stronger after the king's noble act. 

" But," exclaims one of Zaleuchus's subjects, after wit- 
nessing the tragedy. " See, neighbors, the advantage of 
being made of finer clay, and having royal blood in one's 
veins. If one of us had committed that crime, think you 
his Majesty would have given an eye for us ? No, no, it 
is only because it is his own flesh and blood ; it hurts him 
less to do this than to do just what the law said, and there- 
fore he does it. His Majesty is willing to pay an eye 
for the privilege of breaking the law ! " 

Does any one say that, nevertheless, it would deter 
from crime, because the Locrians would argue, that, though 
he spared his son, he would not them ? I reply, so might 



ATTACK ON THE NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 57 

the Parisians have argued, if Louis XV. had pardoned 
his son. They might have said, he pardons his own flesh 
and blood, but it does not follow that he will pardon us. 

But how vastly different, how much lower down, is this 
than what they actually had to say. 

The king by punishing his son has made it absolutely 
certain and clear as day that he will pardon no less crimi- 
nals. But this the Locrians could not say ; therefore there 
was a letting down of justice, and a weakening of it, and 
that was why the experiment would not bear to be re- 
peated. 

But, it may be asked, was there not some conservative 
tendency in Zaleuchus's act ? I reply, not as a question of 
justice, but only as a matter of feeling. If he could suc- 
ceed in exciting his subjects' sympathy for him in his 
parental distress, they might forgive him for once in such 
a letting down of justice. But that is all. 

Therefore the instance is unsound, the illustration breaks 
down, and the objection of the old divinity remains. 

Suffering inflicted on an innocent person, which the law 
does not demand, does not show respect for law, nor sup- 
port it. 

But, it may be said, are we to abandon the New England 
theory as well as the old Scholastic ? If this objection is 
conceded valid, is it not fatal to the theory ? Does it not 
overthrow it from the foundation ? 

To this I reply in the negative. There are two parts 
or propositions included in the theory ; this objection lies 
against one, not both. These two propositions are, — 1. 
The atonement is a declaration or demonstration of God's 
righteousness. 2. It demonstrates that righteousness, by 
showing his determination to punish, and thus supporting 
the law. It is only the latter proposition against which the 
objection lies. It still remains true that the atonement 
is a declaration or demonstration of God's righteousness, 



58 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

though it be false that it is in the particular way of show- 
ing his disposition to punish. It is in some other way than 
this. And just here the theory is immature and incom- 
plete. Just here it needs to be further worked out. The 
fundamental principle of the system, however, still stands 
without damage from objections. 

God set forth Jesus a propitiation to declare his right- 
eousness. How did it declare that righteousness ? Not 
in the particular way specified, but in some other. Can 
that other be pointed out, and if so, what was it ? We 
answer, that it can, and to point it out will be the main 
object of our subsequent investigations. 

Meanwhile, it may perhaps occur to some as an objection, 
that the course of the discussion is extensive, and the mas- 
tery of the subject tasking to the mind. 

This would be an objection, if this doctrine as a scien- 
tific theory were necessary to salvation. If its place were 
among the first or elementary truths, — the milk for 
babes, — if, in short, without a correct theory of atone- 
ment the soul must perish, — in that case it would be a 
grave objection to find a discussion so wide, so profound, 
and so high-soaring. But it is otherwise when we reflect 
that this is one of the higher truths of the system ; a part 
of the strong meat of the Word ; and that Christians of 
full age should feed on that strong meat and go on unto 
perfection. Howbeit, says the Apostle, in malice be ye 
children, but in understanding be men. 

The Christian must not shrink from themes requiring 
patient, long-continued, and tasking thought. The higher 
truths of Christ's kingdom must be high indeed. They 
must demand not only intellect and patience and discipline, 
but earnest prayer and the aid of God's Spirit. If a theory 
of atonement did not require these things, it would be an 
objection fatal against it. It is the central problem of 
God's administration. It is the wisdom of God and the 



ATTACK ON THE NEW ENGLAND THEORY. 59 

power of God. Its scope is from before the foundation of 
the world, till after the heaven and earth have passed away. 
It concerns not man only, but the whole created universe | 
and not the created universe only, but the Creator. It 
declares his righteousness in that mighty rebellion that 
has for ages divided his empire. " And now," says 
Dr. Griffin, "if any are unwilling to harness themselves 
for a conflict with indolence, and to bring their minds up 
to patient and elevated thought, let them close the book 
here. But if they have entered into the feelings of 
Heaven, and caught a desire to search into a subject 
which a thousand ages of study will not exhaust, let them 
offer a humble prayer and then begin." 

Let us breathe together the prayer of one who burned 
and glowed in these sublime investigations : " That God 
would grant us according to the riches of his glory to be 
strengthened with might by his spirit in the inner man ; 
that Christ may dwell in our hearts by faith, that we, being 
rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend 
with all saints what is the breadth and length and depth 
and height, and to .know the love of Christ that passeth 
knowledge ; that we may be filled with all the fulness of 
God." 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE CROSS TO DESTROY SATAN. 

" He also himself likewise took part of the same ; that through 
death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that 
is, the DitViL." — Heb. ii. 14. 

AFTER exhibiting, in the language of their defenders, 
the two theories of atonement that divide the mod- 
ern world, — after hearing the old pronounce the new " the 
most jejune, meagre, and barren ever proposed," and the 
new retort that the old is " impossible, and that man can- 
not be required to believe it," — we are reminded of the 
existence of an ancient theory ignored by both, and the 
thought suggests itself, — perhaps it is by receding so far 
from the ancient Church that the modern has fallen into 
this condition of helpless discord and paralysis. The ele- 
ment of truth in the ancient theory, we have already 
remarked, lay in the prominence it assigned to those 
passages of the Bible connecting the death of Christ with 
the destruction of Satan, as its end. I propose to show 
how prominent this conception really is in the Bible. 

It is not surprising the ancient Church should have 
taken such a passage as that at the head of this chap- 
ter for their starting-point. The matter of astonishment 
is, that the modern Church should coolly develop a theory 
as much without this passage as though it had been ex- 
punged from the Bible. Look, for a moment, at the 
verse ; see how plain, how direct, how to the point. Why 
was the Word made flesh ? In order to die. Why was it 
necessary for Him to die ? In order that through death 






THE CROSS TO DESTROY SATAN. ui 

he might destroy the Devil. And why aim to destroy 
the Devil ? In order to liberate those subject to bondage. 
Now it matters not how imperfect our knowledge may 
be how the Devil had the power of death, and how the 
death of Christ could destroy him : it is impossible for lan- 
guage to state the fact itself more plainly than it is here 
stated. 

Equally explicit is the statement, Rev. xii. 11, " And 
they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb." That 
is, Satan, as mentioned in the verse preceding. He ac- 
cused them before the throne of God, and " they over- 
came him by the blood of the Lamb." That is, overcame 
him in that trial before the throne of God, overcame him 
in the matter of that criminal accusation. It was the 
death of Christ that defeated Satan, and so delivered 
them. 

A third testimony is contained in 1 John iii. 8 : " For 
this cause was the Son of God manifested, that he might 
destroy the works of the Devil." This is by the same au- 
thor with the preceding. Its meaning is the same. To 
destroy the Devil, and to destroy the works of the Devil, 
are substantially the same. The Son of God was mani- 
fested to do this. This was the object of his incarnation. 
Of course his death is implied, as in the other passages. 
It was the comprehensive object, not only of his death, 
but of his whole humiliation. 

Another great testimony is in Genesis iii. 15 : "I 
will put enmity between thee and the woman, and be- 
tween thy seed and her seed. He shall bruise thy head, 
and thou shalt bruise his heel." 

The bruising of the heel was when, through the influ- 
ence of Satan, Christ was betrayed and crucified. The 
bruising of the head of the serpent is still future, when 
the object of the mediatorial system is fully accomplished. 
It does not expressly say that the bruising of the head 



62 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

shall be a consequence of the bruising of the heel, but 
it implies it by suggestion. The next thing presented 
to the mind, after the idea of a biting of the heel by a ser- 
pent, is the deadly crushing of that serpent's head by the 
heel he has wounded. 

An implication of this kind in symbols so full of mean- 
ing is a prophecy of the strongest kind. Hence, the 
Church has always regarded this passage as the germ of all 
prophecy and all promise. 

The hostile action and reaction of Christ and Satan is 
here indicated to form the subject of the grand epic of 
human history. Satan shall inflict excruciating agony 
upon Christ, but only in proportion as the bruising of a 
heel to the whole body ; Christ, however, shall inflict 
upon Satan a destruction so complete, as to be properly 
denoted by nothing less than the crushing of the head. 

At the same time, to show that this was the means of 
human deliverance, Adam and Eve are clothed with coats 
of skins, denoting justification through Christ. Thus, over 
the threshold of human history God seems to say, in vivid 
emblems set up before the eyes of all generations, '■' The 
object for which this world is fitted up and human history 
begun is to bruise the serpent's head by the very heel 
that head has wounded, and so provide a spotless robe of 
righteousness for naked and guilty man." 

Let us, then, examine the personal career of Christ, 
and see what his estimate was of his relations to the 
great Apostate. 

The first thing after his baptism and recognition as 
Son of God, he is driven of the spirit into the wilderness 
to be tempted of the Devil. Here, at last, we see the 
seed of the woman 'placed within reach of the serpent; 
and that this was no superficial ordeal we may judge 
from the forty days' fast, and from the nature of the 
temptations. 



THE CEOSS TO DESTROY SATAN. 63 

In the second year of his ministry, he is accused by the 
rulers of performing miracles by Satanic agency ; to which 
he replies, that his object is first to bind the strong man, 
and then to spoil his goods ; showing his clear conscious- 
ness that the defeat of Satan was the foremost object to be 
accomplished. Further on (1 John viii. 44), he retorts the 
charge upon his assailants, declaring that they are of their 
father, the Devil, and giving a vivid portrait of his real 
character. " He was a murderer from the beginning, and 
abode not in the truth ; when he speaketh a lie, he speak- 
eth of his own, for he is a liar and the father of it." In 
him and his personal history lies the true origin of evil, so 
much disputed. Lies are of his own, born of his mind. 
Thus Jesus develops a profound knowledge of the being, 
history, and character of him he had to overcome. 

In the parable of the sower, he attributes to him the 
catching away out of men's minds the seeds of truth, lest 
they should be saved. In the parable of the tares, he 
says, The field is the world ; the good seed, the children 
of the kingdom ; he that sowed them, the Son of Man. 
The tares, the children of the Wicked One ; the enemy 
that sowed them, the Devil. Thus Christ reduces all 
history to a simple theory of counter agency between 
himself and his enemy. The field is the world, and the 
sowing is through all ages from the beginning. 

In our Lord's prayer, he inserts a petition literally ren- 
dered, " Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from 
the Evil One." When the disciples rejoiced because 
demons were subject to them, he said, " I saw Satan as 
lightning falling from heaven." An evident allusion to 
Isaiah's words, " How art thou fallen, &c, O Lucifer, 
Son of the Morning ! " In saying I saw him falling, he 
means the same as I foresaw, — saw in the future, — a 
common way of speaking with the prophets. As if he 
said, This is to be the end of my conflict. Satan will 
certainly fall like lightning from heaven. 



64 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

In John xvi. 11 he says, the Holy Spirit shall convince 
the world of judgment, because the prince of this world is 
judged. As much as to say, that, when Satan is judged, 
the world will be judged. That agency of the Holy Spirit 
purchased by Christ's death, which judges him, will be 
the judgment of the world. Could anything more signifi- 
cant be conceived ? 

When Christ was betrayed, it says of Judas, " Satan put 
it into his heart," and again, " Satan entered into him." 
Hence, when the band led by Judas came to seize him, 
he says to Peter, " Thinkest thou that I cannot now 
pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more 
than twelve legions of angels ? But how, then, shall the 
Scripture be fulfilled, that thus it must be ? " In the 
agony in the garden and on the cross, this, as the ancient 
Church imperfectly conceived, was one source of his 
sufferings, namely, the power of darkness. The twenty- 
second Psalm is unquestionably prophetic and descriptive 
of his dreadful mental agonies. 

Such is the bruising of the heel. The whole humili- 
ation of Christ, including that signified by the words of the 
Creed, " He descended into Hades," is a fulfilment of 
Genesis hi. 15 : " Thou shalt bruise his heel." The 
retaliatory bruising of the serpent's head is exhibited in 
the Apocalypse. The serpent, after various scenes, is 
finally cast into the lake of fire, and " He that sat upon 
the throne saith, Behold, I make all things new." 

Thus we see that this is the plot of the whole Bible. 
We begin in Eden, with a certain enmity between two 
seeds foretold and initiated ; we conclude in the New Jeru- 
salem, with that enmity satiated, in the utter destruction 
of the one by the other, and the regeneration of the uni- 
verse in consequence. 



CHAPTER VII. 

AZAZEL. 
"One lot for Jehovah, and one lot foe Azazel." — Lev. xvi. 8. 

IN the sacrifices of the great day of atonement all the 
scattered rays of typical light are collected and concen- 
trated in a focus of singular intensity of illumination. 

In the Epistle to the Hebrews the lens is so adjusted as 
to cast that burning focus upon Christ. The tabernacle, 
itself, we are told, " was a type for the time then present " ; 
all its fixtures, " copies of things in the heavens," its 
priests " served unto the example and shadow of heavenly 
things " ; the holy of holies was a type of heaven itself, 
the annual entrance into it of the high-priest, with blood 
of victims, prefigured the entrance of Christ into heaven, 
" to appear in the presence of God for us." 

As the high-priest laid aside his gorgeous pontifical 
robes, and officiated in the white linen dress of a common 
priest, so Christ emptied himself, and took the form of a 
servant, and offered sacrifice, himself the priest, himself 
the victim. As the high-priest, after going into the holy 
of holies with blood, finally came forth to the waiting 
congregation in full pontifical robes, so " unto them that 
look for him, Christ shall appear a second time," in all 
the splendors of his eternal kingdom and glory. 

Thus far we follow closely in the track of inspired inter- 
pretation of emblems. There are, however, emblems in 
the ceremonial of the great day of atonement which the 
Epistle to the Hebrews does not interpret. 

We refer, in particular, to the two goats on which lots 



00 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

were cast, — one for Jehovah, the other for Azazel, — the 
former being slain, and its blood sprinkled in the holy of 
holies, the latter being let go alive in the wilderness. 
We are left to determine the meaning of these symbols as 
we best can, according to the laws of analogy. 

It is generally admitted, that the goat let loose and the 
goat which was slain are one and the same symbol,- — a 
double symbol of the same person, Christ. 

Two goats were to be presented before the Lord by the 
high-priest. They must be exactly alike in value, size, 
age, color, — they must be counterparts. Placing these 
goats before him, the high-priest put both hands into an 
urn containing two golden lots, and drew them out, one 
in each hand. On the one was engraved La-Yehovah 
(for Jehovah), on the other, La- Azazel (for Azazel). 

The goat on which the lot La-Yehovah fell was slain. 
After its blood had been sprinkled in the holy of holies, 
the high-priest laid his hands on the head of the second 
goat, confessed the sins of the congregation, and gave him 
to a fit man to lead away and let go in the wilderness ; 
the man thus employed being obliged to wash his clothes 
and person before, re turning to the congregation. 

That Christ is represented by both goats is the common 
opinion. As Matthew Henry says : " Christ was prefig- 
ured by the two goats, which both made one offering." 
The point on which opinions differ is in regard to the 
meaning of the word Azazel, and the sending away of the 
second goat. Three opinions have been maintained. 

The first opinion regards Azazel as the name of a moun- 
tain or precipice from which the goat was to be thrown. 
This opinion, however, has few supporters, since no such 
mountain existed, and it seems clear, from the record, 
that the goat must be let go alive. 

A second opinion is, that Azazel is the name of the goat 
itself, meaning escape-goat. Our English translators give 



AZAZEL. 67 

this in the text, but place the word Azazel in the margin, 
as was their custom in cases where they were in some 
uncertainty. Against this opinion the following objections 
may be urged : — 

Azazel is an uncommon word, found nowhere else in the 
Bible. There was a familiar expression for scape-goat, 
namely, Sheir Meshullah ; and it is improbable Moses 
would have left a term familiar for one entirely strange. 

This meaning, also, is embarrassed by grammatical diffi- 
culties. The root from which the word goat must be 
taken in composing scape-goat happens to be feminine, 
making it the escape-she-goat. Again, the use of the 
prepositions is such that, if rendered literally, they would 
make the goat to be sent away to itself. Thus, " The goat 
on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be .... to let him go 
to Azazel." Hence many of the best Hebrew scholars, 
such as Witsius, Gesenius, Robinson, Spencer, Stowe, 
Faber, Hengstenberg, have rejected this meaning. 

The third opinion is, that Azazel is a proper name 
of Satan. In support of this, the following points are 
urged : — 

The use of the preposition implies it. The same prepo- 
sition is used on both lots, La-Yehovah, La- Azazel, and 
if the one indicates a person, it seems natural the other 
should. Especially, considering the act of casting lots; 
If one is for Jehovah, the other would seem for some 
other person or being ; not one for Jehovah, and the othefc 
for the goat itself. 

What goes to confirm this is, that the most ancient 
paraphrases and translations treat Azazel as a proper 
name. The Chaldee paraphrase and the targums of 
Onkelos and Jonathan would certainly have translated it 
if it was not a proper name, but they do not. The Septu- 
agint, or oldest Greek version, renders it by a7ro7ro//,7rato<?, 
a word applied by the Greeks to a malign deity, some- 
times appeased by sacrifices. 



68 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Another confirmation is found in the Book of Enoch, 
where the name Azalzel, evidently a corruption of Azazel, 
is given to one of the fallen angels, thus plainly showing 
what was the prevalent understanding of the Jews at that 
day. 

Still another evidence is found in the Arabic, where 
Azazel is employed as the name of the Evil Spirit. 

In addition to these, we have the evidence of the Jew- 
ish work Zohar, and of the Cabalistic and Rabbinical 
writers. They tell us that the following proverb was 
current among the Jews : " On the day of atonement, 
a gift to Sammael." Hence Moses Gerundinensis feels 
called to say that it is not a sacrifice, but only done 
because commanded by God. 

Another step in the evidence is when we find this same 
opinion passing from the Jewish to the early Christian 
Church. Origen was the most learned of the Fathers, 
and on such a point as this, the meaning of a Hebrew 
word, his testimony is reliable. Says Origen : " He who 
is called in the Septuagint aTroTrofATrcuos, and in the He- 
brew Azazel, is no other than the Devil." 

Lastly, a circumstance is mentioned of the Emperor 
Julian, the apostate, that confirms the argument. He 
brought, as an objection against the Bible, that Moses 
commanded a sacrifice to the Evil Spirit. An objection 
he never could have thought of, had not Azazel been 
generally regarded as a proper name. 

In view, then, of the difficulties attending any other 
meaning, and the accumulated evidence in favor of this, 
Hengstenberg affirms, with great confidence, that Azazel 
cannot be anything else but another name for Satan. 

If it should be objected that God would not sanction a 
sacrifice to Satan, even in appearance, and that therefore 
this view cannot be true, we reply, that it is not neces- 
sary to regard the goat as a sacrifice to Azazel ; and that 



AZAZEL. 69 

there is not even an appearance of it, but a studied 
prohibition. 

A sacrifice, as has been well shown by the English au- 
thor Outram, implies the taking of life. His words are : 
" Offerings which were put to death, divided, consumed, 

were sacrifices in the vocabulary of the Jews This 

would exclude certain things sometimes called sacrifices; 
for example, the bird used in cleansing the leper, the 
scape -goat, &c." 

Hence, not only was there no sacrifice, but there was 
a studied negation of the idea. It is known that the 
Egyptians offered such sacrifices to the Evil One, under 
the name of Typhon, and that the practice was almost 
universal. Now, by sacrificing the first goat to Jehovah, 
and letting the second go alive, and both by casting lots, 
i. e. an appeal to God, there was a direct contradiction 
of the Gentile practice. It said, virtually, this sacrifice is 
to God alone, and not at all to Satan. There is a relation 
to Satan, but not a sacrifical one. Hence, in the next 
chapter, it says, " And they shall no more offer their 
sacrifices unto demons." 

To this rite, then, we may attribute the disappearance 
of all sacrifices to evil deities, as such, forever after in 
Israel. They, indeed, worshipped idols, but always under 
the theory of their representing the good, not the evil 
power. 

It remains, then, to ask, what is the meaning symbol- 
ized, if this be the true view ? It is generally agreed that 
the second goat represented Christ, bearing the sins of the 
world. But what was denoted by sending him into the 
wilderness ? 

Matthew Henry says : " The slain goat was a type of 
Christ dying for our sins, the scape-goat, a type of Christ 
rising again for our resurrection." But he forgets that 
the goat was so unclean that its touch rendered the man 



70 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

by whom it was sent unclean, and necessitated a thorough 
washing. Was Christ unclean in his resurrection ? It 
is said, 1 Timothy hi. 16, that he was "justified in the 
Spirit"; and Romans iv. 25, "He was delivered for our 
offences, but raised for our justification." Purity is the 
grand idea associated with Christ's resurrection, and there- 
fore such a view of the type is manifestly impossible. 

Others attempt an explanation by saying the scape-goat 
" signifies the cleansing influence of faith in the sacrifice 
of Christ " ; that is, represents Christ as carrying be- 
lievers' sins away from them, out of sight forever. 

But the difficulty with this is, that it represents Christ 
himself as hidden from sight forever, just as much as their 
sins ; one is inseparable from the other. And it would 
resolve itself into this, that the only method in which 
believers can part with their sins, is by at the same time 
parting with Christ forever. 

Thus, the theory which makes Azazel a name of the 
scape-goat labors here, and is reduced to extremities. 
Compare, then, the other, and the interpretation it enables 
us to give. What is meant by Azazel, considered as a 
name of Satan, and what is the typical import of send- 
ing the goat to him ? 

The meaning of the term, viewed as a proper name, 
was stated, in 1677, by Spencer, Dean of Ely, to be 
Powerful Apostate, or Mighty Receder. The import 
of the transaction is thus stated by Faber, following 
Witsius : — 

" At the very commencement of the Bible it was fore- 
told that, although the promised seed of the woman shall 
finally bruise the head of the serpent, yet the serpent 
should iirst bruise his heel, or mortal part. If, then, the 
serpent was to bruise his mortal part, that mortal part 
must needs be delivered over to the power of the serpent ; 
for of himself he could possess no superiority, even during 



AZAZEL. 71 

a single moment. Hence it will follow that Satan, bent 
only on satiating his own malice, and unconscious that he 
was actually subserving the Divine purposes of mercy, 
was the agent who, through his earthly tools, effected 
the death of Messiah. 

" Such being the Scriptural character of our Lord, it is 
evident that no single type can perfectly exhibit it in both 
its parts. The various bloody sacrifices of the law pre- 
figured it in one part, namely, that which respected the 
atonement made with God for the sins of men ; but they 
spoke nothing concerning its other part, namely, that 
which related to the delivering up Messiah to the Ser- 
pent, with the permissive power of bruising his mortal 
frame. 

" On this same part they were silent, and if it were at 
all to be shadowed out under the ceremonial law, such 
a purpose could only be effected by the introduction of 
a new type, connected, indeed, with the usual sacrificial 
type, but kept, nevertheless, studiously distinct from it. 
A double type, in short, must be employed, if the char- 
acter of Christ, under its twofold aspect, was to be com- 
pletely prefigured. 

" Now, the two goats, which are jointly denominated 
a sin-offering, constitute a type of this identical descrip- 
tion. The two together present us with a perfect 
symbolical delineation of our Lord's official character, 
while he was accomplishing the great work of our re- 
demption. The goat which fell to the lot of Jehovah 
was devoted as a sin-offering, after the manner of any 

other sin-offering, by being piacularly slain But the 

goat which fell to the lot of Azazel was first imputatively 
loaded with the sins of the whole people, and was then 
symbolically given up to the rage of the Evil Spirit, by 
being turned loose into the wilderness, which was deemed 
his favorite terrestrial haunt. 



72 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

" This second type represented the Messiah, burdened 
with the transgressions of all mankind, deserted for a 
season by his Heavenly Father, and delivered unto the 
hand of the Prince of Darkness, with a full permission 
granted of mortally bruising his heel, or human nature." 

We have omitted to mention the peculiar theory of 
Professor Bush, who, regarding Azazel as a proper name 
of Satan, considers the second goat as symbolizing the 
Jewish nation, the unbelieving Israel, abandoned to the 
power of the Devil. 

To us, however, it is plain that the two goats are 
one ; that they represent one and the same person in 
different parts of his career ; that the first exhibits the 
relation of his humiliation to God; that the second ex- 
hibits the relation of his humiliation to Satan. 

That his humiliation had relations to both, Scripture 
emphatically teaches. It pleased the Lord to bruise him ; 
and yet to the Serpent it was said, " Thou shalt bruise 
his heel " ; and, in Hebrews ii. 14, the object of his 
incarnation is stated to be, " that through death he might 
destroy him that had the power of death." 

And here, we observe, there is a meaning in the em- 
blems that Faber failed to perceive. If the whole humili- 
ation of Christ was to be typified, that part of it must 
be typified which lay between death and the resurrection. 
" Christ's humiliation after death," we are taught, " con- 
sisted in his being buried, and continuing in the state 
of the dead, and under the power of death, till the third 
day, which hath been otherwise expressed in these words, 
' He descended into Hades.' " x 

But one goat could only bring the representation of 

Christ's humiliation down to his death. The slain goat 

could not reach that part of the humiliation which lay 

beyond. For that the second goat was necessary, and 

1 Larger Catechism, Q. 50. 



AZAZEL. 73 

by going out laden with sin in the wilderness, into a land 
cut off, or, as the margin reads, a land " of separation," 
to Azazel, typifies, exactly, Christ entering Hades, the 
separate state, and coming under " the power of death." 

The only other instance in which this curious double 
type appears is in the cleansing of a leper, and a house 
contaminated with leprous contagion ; the leprosy being 
the most striking image of sin. Two birds were taken ; 
one was killed in an earthen vessel over running water, 
the other dipped in the blood of the slain bird, and let go. 
Thus the bird that flew away was identified with the bird 
that was slain, and made to perform the part of one dead ; 
thus typifying Christ after death. The bird flew away 
into the desert outside the camp, where the goat was 
let go. 

A more striking image of the departed spirit of one 
slain can scarcely be conceived than that flitting bird, 
sprinkled with the blood of its fellow. 

Do any object at finding the idea of Satan so prominent 
in the focal centre of all sacrificial analogies ? 

Why should it not be prominent, if to destroy him was 
the very object of Christ's death? "He was God's 
chosen champion ; ordained to avenge the cause of God, 
on man's behalf, against the enemy of God and the se- 
ducer of man. This latter conception of the office and 
work of Christ is comprehensive of both the others, and 
in it, accordingly, he was announced in the original threat- 
ening against the serpent The fulfilment of this 

primeval promise comprehends the entire work of the Son 
of God." i 

Would it not be strange, if in all the symbols of the 
sacrificial system there were not a single intimation of 
the serpent's existence ? and where should we expect 
to see his baleful shadow, if not here, on the great 

1 Elohim Eevealed, p. 628. 
4 



74 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

day of atonement, when the subjection of the seed of 
the woman to the serpent's power of death was to be 
most vividly and minutely portrayed ? 

Is there not a grand rebellion in the universe ? Is 
there not a great leader of that rebellion ? Is he not the 
life and soul of that rebellion, which he instigated? Is 
he not apostate from God? Is he not a receder, or 
seceder, the prime Secessionist of the skies, and father 
of all generations of vipers to the end of time ? 

Where, if not in the tableau of the great day of 
atonement, should the government and the arch-rebel 
stand face to face, while lots are cast on Christ between 
them ? Unite the separate indications in due order, and 
we have the following lesson taught by the emblems of 
the great day of atonement : — 

A rebellion exists. Lucifer revolts from his allegiance, 
and makes war on the Divine government. Christ is 
appointed to put down the rebellion. He makes this 
world the battle-field. He assumes the form of a servant ; 
enters the strong man's castle ; resists all his temptations ; 
suffers death, and descends to Hades ; ascends to Heaven 
"with his own blood"; employs the facts respecting his 
own sufferings and death to produce effects upon the 
mind of the universe ; and returns again in glory to those 
who love his appearing. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 
" Thou akt the Anointed Cheeub." — Ezek. xxviii. 14. 

IN this address to the king of Tyre are several expres- 
sions too high for a merely mortal sovereign. Hence 
the impression has extensively prevailed that the Holy 
Spirit regarded the king of Tyre as a kind of image 
of Satan, and in addressing him uttered things passing 
beyond the emblem, and applying directly to the reality. 

Such was the view of Augustine, Jerome, Tertullian, 
Ambrose, and other early Fathers. Indeed, Fairbairn 
remarks, " Most of the earlier commentators have sup- 
posed that verses 12-14 were not properly used of the 
king of Tyre, but mystically of Satan." 

At the same time, Fairbairn characterizes this as an 
arbitrary mode of interpretation. Arbitrary or not, 
however, it is a mode that has commended itself to the 
mind of the Church for ages, as wellnigh self-evident. 
As an illustration, let it be remembered that the title 
Lucifer, now universally current as a proper appellative 
of Satan, owes its application to him wholly to this method 
applied to Isaiah xiv. 12, " How art thou fallen from 
heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning ! " 

Why, then, is this method arbitrary? If we are to 
admit types at all, why not here ? If David was a type 
of Christ, why not the king of Tyre a type of Satan ? 
Are not the principles and spirit of the God of this world 
embodied in the great Gentile monarchies, Egypt, Baby- 
lon, Tyre, Persia, Greece, Rome, as really as the spirit 



76 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

and principles of Christ in Israel? If the deliverance 
of Israel, at the exodus, is a type of the redemption 
of the Church, is not the destruction of Pharaoh and his 
hosts also a type of the final overthrow of Satan and his 
kingdom? How can one, part of that sublime panorama 
be symbolic, and not the other? 

That the king of Babylon must be a type of Satan, 
one would think almost self-evident, if we glance at the 
Apocalypse, and the contrasted use of Babylon and Je- 
rusalem. If Jerusalem be a type of the true Church, 
and Babylon of the false, and if David be the type of 
Christ, then how can the king of Babylon but be the type 
of Satan ? And if David says things apparently of him- 
self, which we are told he spake of Christ, why should 
it be deemed arbitrary to say that he addresses to the 
king of Babylon, or of Tyre, words piercing through the 
veil of flesh to the invisible reality behind ? 

So far from being arbitrary, especially in a chapter like 
this, replete with imagery too lofty for any being of mere 
mortal mould, it appears natural, in the highest degree, 
to admit such reference. Let us endeavor, then, to set 
forth the substance of Scripture teaching in respect to 
the original angelic empire, and of that exalted being 
here addressed as the Anointed Cherub. 

The creation of the angels was ancient. " Who laid 
the corner-stone thereof [the earth], when the morning 
stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for 
joy?" (Job xxxviii. 7.) The sons of God and morning 
stars here mentioned are the angels already in being, 
and witnesses of the sublime creative work. Vast as the 
periods of time science indicates to have rolled away since 
the primary strata of the globe were formed, they are 
but a part of the age of those immortal hosts, ever young, 
who blazed and flashed around God's throne before this 
world began. 



THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 77 

The angels are also numerous. The heavenly empire 
is vast. The universe is an ocean of many waters, com- 
pared to which earth's myriads are as drops of the buck- 
et. " Ye are come," says the Apostle, "unto .... an 
innumerable company of angels." When in the garden 
Peter offered to defend his Master, " Thinkest thou," 
said Jesus, " I cannot pray to my Father, and he shall 
presently give me more than twelve legions of angels ? " 
If twelve legions be thus easily spoken of, as a mere 
escort, or body-guard, what must be the grand army of 
the skies ? It must be even as John, in the Revelation, 
says, " Ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands 
of thousands." 

The angels are beautiful. They are called "glories," 
"gods," "sons of God," "morning stars." And when- 
ever their appearance is described, it is in terms of 
surpassing loveliness and overpowering splendor. An 
angel descends, and the whole earth is lightened with 
his glory ; another darts from the sky like a falling star. 

" Since we are told," says a recent English writer, 
" that there is a spiritual body, the Scripture, in calling 
angels spirits, does not assert that the angelic nature is 
incorporeal. The contrary seems expressly implied by 
the words in which our Lord declares, that after the 
resurrection men shall be like the angels, because, as 
is elsewhere said, their bodies, as well as their spirits, shall 
have been made entirely like his. It may be noticed, 
also, that the glorious appearance ascribed to angels in 
Scripture is the same as that . which shone out in our 
Lord's transfiguration, and, moreover, that whenever 
angels have been manifest to man, it has always been 
in human form. The very fact that the titles ' sons 
of God,' 'gods,' applied to them, are also given to men, 
points, in the same way, to a difference only of degree, 
and an identity of kind, between the human and the 
angelic nature." 



78 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

This was the constant belief of the ancient Christian 
Church for a thousand years, as it had been of the Jewish 
Church from the beginning. " We ought to believe," 
says Augustine, that the angels have bodies most ethe- 
real and luminous, such as ours will be hereafter." John 
of Thessalonica says : " The Church universal considers 
angels as not totally incorporeal and invisible, but as of 
subtle forms, aerial and igneous." " And who will pre- 
sume," says Robert Hall, "to set limits to the creative 
power in the organization of matter, or affirm that it is 
not, in the hand of its Author, susceptible of a refinement 
which shall completely exclude it from the notice of our 
senses." Accordingly, Milton represents Raphael as 
saying : — 

" What surmounts the reach 
Of human sense, I shall delineate so, 
By likening spiritual to corporeal forms, 
As may express them best ; though what if earth 
Be but the shadow of heaven, and things therein, 
Each to other like, more than on earth is thought." 

How striking, then, the expression of the Prophet, con- 
sidered as applied to one of the angelic world : " Thou 
sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, perfect in beauty ! 
Every precious stone was thy covering, sardius, topaz, 
diamond, sapphire, emerald, carbuncle, and gold ; . . . . 
thou art the Anointed Cherub that covereth, and I have 
set thee so, thou wast upon the holy mountain of God, 
thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones 
of fire." 

In these words indistinct images of splendor, and ex- 
quisite beauty and glory, are presented to the mind, pow- 
erfully appealing to the imagination. How inconceivably 
bright and beautiful must an innumerable company of 
such creatures be, ten thousand times ten thousand, and 
thousands of thousands ! 



THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 79 

The angels are powerful. We find such expressions 
as "mighty angels," "angels that excel in strength," 
"angels greater in power and might." One angel, in 
the Apocalypse, has power over fire, another over the 
winds. Angel after angel, by the blast of a trumpet, or 
the pouring a phial, modifies all the world's affairs. An 
angel, of old, slew 180,000 Assyrians in a night. God 
gives Satan permission to afflict Job, and presently we 
see Sabeans, Chaldeans, lightning, whirlwind, disease, and 
death hurled, with amazing rapidity, one after another, 
by an unseen hand. As to power of a higher kind, the 
power of mind, scientific control, organization, moral in- 
fluence, it is, like the other, vast. 

Dr. South speaks of angels as the top of creation, lively 
and bright resemblances of Deity, and says, " It would 
nonplus the tongue of angels themselves to express the 
greatness of their obligation " to God for giving them 
" a knowledge that dives into the recesses of nature, and 
spies out all the secret workings of second causes by 
a certain and immediate view." Now, if we consider 
the native capacity of angels, and remember that they 
never tire, but day without night, age after age, inces- 
santly flash forward in the path of intense activity, what 
must be now their amazing intellectual strength ? 

Although the modern mind has almost lost the thought, 
angels exist in highly organized forms of society ; with 
different orders and grades. Daniel calls Michael one 
of the chief princes, from whence the Greek term arch- 
angel. St. Paul recognizes the title, by saying that the 
trump of the archangel shall sound to wake the dead. 
He also frequently alludes to differences of rank, though 
without specific information respecting them. Thus, 
Romans viii. 38, "angels, principalities, and powers"; 
1 Cor. xv. 24, " rule, authority, and power " ; Eph. i. 
21, " principality, and power, and might, and dominion " ; 



80 KEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

iii. 10, " principalities and powers " ; vi. 12, " principalities 
and powers, and rulers of the darkness of this world " • 
Col. i. 16, " thrones, dominions, principalities, and pow 
ers " ; ii. 15, " principalities and powers " ; 1 Peter iii. 
21, " angels, authorities, and powers." 

These terms, Dr. Dwight remarks, " denote that they 
sit on thrones, exercise dominion, hold authority, preside 
in government, and are invested with power." 

In every government, he argues, there must be public 
officers, numerous in proportion to the greatness of that 
government. In a town few, in a province more, in an 
empire like Rome, an immense number, in a world, a 
still more immense, and in the universe of God, a number 
and variety inconceivable. 

Indeed, the Scripture speaks of the heavenly hosts as 
an immense army, and of God as the Lord of Sabaoth. 
And Milton, in the closest keeping with all Scripture 
intimations, thus describes the convocation of the celes- 
tial myriads : — 

" Th' empyreal host 
Of angels, by imperial summons called 
Innumerable before the Almighty's throne, 
Forthwith from all the ends of heaven appeared 
Under their hierarchs, in orders bright 
Ten thousand thousand ensigns, high advanced, 
Stream in the air, and for distinction serve 
Of hierarchies, orders, and degrees, 



Thrones, dominations, princedoms, virtues, powers." 

But, to complete the view, this sublime and complex 
organization seems to have been united under one chief 
spirit, of superior dignity and station, as the creature 
head, and visible representative of the invisible deity. 
This was the best way conceivable in which the universe 
could be organized and arranged ; and to this all the in- 



THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 81 

dications of Scripture point. " Thou art the Anointed 
Cherub that covereth, and I have set thee so ; thou wast 
upon the holy mount of God." This is the proper lan- 
guage to denote a coronation. It is strikingly similar 
to that in Ps. ii., uttered in respect to Messiah, " Yet 
have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion." The 
Anointed Cherub is similarly addressed, as having been 
originally set upon the holy mount of God. He was set, 
or seated upon a throne, and anointed, as the creature 
head and regent of the angelic universe. 

The cherub is the most exalted of all known emblems, 
nearest the throne of Jehovah, most vitally connected 
with his majesty, and identified with his administration. 

That such was the exalted station originally held by 
Lucifer may be considered the established belief. Mil- 
ton, a careful student of the theology of his own and 
preceding ages, speaks of Lucifer, as 

« Of the first, 
If not the first archangel, great in power, 
In favor, and pre-eminence." 

President Edwards observes, " Lucifer, before his fall, 
was the morning star, the covering cherub, the highest 
and brightest of all creatures." 

Dr. Hopkins speaks of him as one " who was at the 
head of all the angels, and the most noble creature God 
had made." And Dr. Dwight calls him " an angel of 
pre-eminent distinction in heaven." 

It is scarcely necessary to add, that the angels were 
all originally holy. " Thou wast perfect in thy ways, 
from the day thou wast created, till iniquity was found 
in thee." On which Augustine remarks, that the Devil 
" must have performed many excellent things in that state 
of existence he had before he sinned." 

It is possible for God to create minds in such a state 



82 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

that they will freely and spontaneously begin by loving 
him supremely and each other impartially. There is no 
conceivable reason why, if God create minds at all, he 
could not create them so that goodness would be natural 
and instinctive. On the contrary, this is the very way 
in which we should think infinite Wisdom could, and 
infinite Love would, create all his creatures. 

The angels were, in fact, so created that they did 
begin by loving one another impartially and God su- 
premely. They were lovely and loving one another. 
They were tenderly attached to God, and prompt to do 
his pleasure. 

Such was the holy, happy universe, in its first estate, 
ere the foundations of the world were laid, or time began. 
Far back in the mysterious ages of eternity, far beyond 
our computation, though not beyond that of God, that 
glorious empire stood, and for ages was the scene of spot- 
less purity and happiness. God over all, and in all, his 
creatures countless as the sand on the sea-shore, or the 
stars of heaven, arranged in ascending orders and grades, 
and culminating in one superb and immaculate creature, 
himself, headed up in God ! If such was the original 
condition of the universe, the question arises, how sin 
could possibly enter. Some minds have felt the difficulty 
so strongly upon this point, that they have rejected the 
Bible account of the matter, and denied the existence 
of any such sinless state of the universe. But the answer 
to the question is simple. Sin is, in its own nature, 
anomalous, and therefore mysterious ; it is, in its own 
nature, an unaccountable thing. For the moment we 
admit that it is properly accounted for, i. e. the moment 
we have assigned a good and sufficient cause for it, that 
moment it ceases to be sin. A good and sufficient cause 
is a good and sufficient excuse, and that which has a good 
and sufficient excuse is not sin. To account for sin, 



THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 83 

therefore, is to defend it, and to defend it is to certify 
that it is not sin. 

Therefore the objection, that it is inconceivable and 
unaccountable that sin should enter in such a perfect 
universe, amounts to nothing but saying, that sin is ex- 
ceeding sinful, inexcusable, and destitute of the least de- 
fence or justification. Sin is a violation of all law, a 
departure from all original nature, a thing essentially 
lawless, anomalous, and mysterious. We can identify 
the fact of its existence. We can describe the manner, 
we can discover the occasion, but the cause, the good 
and sufficient cause, God himself, and the judgment-seat, 
will demonstrate cannot be shown, for it does not exist. 

It will be the final and eternal condemnation of the 
Devil and his angels, and all identified with them, that, 
when the Judge demands, Why have ye done thus ? what 
reason can you assign ? what cause can you specify ? 
every mouth will be stopped, and the whole world of re- 
bellion stand speechless before God. The place, how- 
ever, where sin entered we are enabled to point out. 
" Thou wast perfect in thy ways, till iniquity was found 
in thee." Sin entered by the defection of one individual. 
That individual was at the head, not at the foot. Sin 
is of patrician rank, not plebeian. Sin is of celestial 
growth, not terrestrial. Sin is of spiritual nature, not 
material. It is neither the product of a material organi- 
zation like ours, nor the blundering mistake of a low 
grade of undeveloped intelligences. Above all things, sin 
was not a nature, nor the development of a nature, but 
the exact contrary; it was the utter revei^sal and repeal 
and abuse of a nature. It supervened in spite of the 
highest and purest nature ever created. 

We are informed, however, of the occasion and man- 
ner of the change. " Thine heart was lifted up by rea- 
son of thy beauty ; thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by 
reason of thy brightness." 



84 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

God surely was not chargeable with being the cause 
of sin, by making the covering cherub as good and 
noble and beautiful and like himself as he could. The 
creature was alone in fault for the change. If we think 
that God should have made minds so that beauty and 
power and glory could not afford occasion for vanity 
and pride, the answer is, that such minds would be 
oysters, not angels. Would we have God reign over 
snails and muscles and zoophytes ? 

But the prophet goes still further. " By the multi- 
tude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of 

thee with violence, and thou hast sinned Thou 

hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine 
iniquities .... the iniquities of thy traffic." Here traffic 
is the emblem of corrupt spiritual administration. The 
corruptions of the visible Church, or spiritual Babylon, 
are described in Revelation xviii., in language borrowed 
from the chapter before this, describing the commerce 
of Tyre. It denotes the use of spiritual offices and 
functions for selfish purposes, instead of for the good 
of others and the glory of God. 

Now it is in this way that all earthly empires and 
churches have been and are corrupted. It is by these 
principles Lucifer deceives and corrupts the whole world 
from the beginning, and in so doing he only continues 
what he originally begun. He has not introduced a 
new kind of sin into this world, he has not set up a 
new kind of empire of darkness ; it is the same sort of 
sin, and the same realm of darkness, energized in and 
ruled by the same laws and principles. Instead of pre- 
siding over that extensive celestial realm with generous 
self-sacrifice and unselfish care for the good of others, 
he began, by degrees, to consult his own honor and priv- 
ilege and aggrandizement. He used his subjects for him- 
self, instead of giving himself for his subjects. 



THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 85 

This corrupted his administration. It corrupted him, 
and corrupted his associates, and corrupted his inferiors. 
It corrupted them on the same philosophical principles 
that churches and states are corrupted continually in 
this world before our eyes. We see and know by sad 
experience the carrying out and continuation of that he 
then and there begun. 

It is of great importance to obtain a full knowledge of 
the original heavenly empire. If Christ died to destroy 
the works of the Devil, it is desirable to know what his 
works are, and what the nature of his power that de- 
manded such an infinite sacrifice. The bearing of this 
subject upon the theory of atonement is evident. Jen- 
kyn lays it down as the first object of the atonement to 
" vindicate the Divine decrees from having been accessory 

to the intrusion of sin The revolters against the 

Divine government are loath to ascribe their disaffection 

entirely to themselves But the atonement shows 

that God was in no wise accessory, either by secret decree, 
by arbitrary withdrawment of influences, nor by any de- 
ficiency of government." 

But if the atonement is to show this, it presupposes that 
we understand the facts- and principles on which sin actu- 
ally did enter. But to understand these, it is necessary 
to understand what preceded sin, — how the angels were 
created, how organized and subordinated, how privileged 
and blessed, how under the headship of one sublime crea- 
ture, and how, therefore, sin came in the most causeless 
place conceivable, — the place where God can be seen to 
be at an infinite remove from being its author. 

Suspending here for a moment the onward movement 
of investigation, let us remark how vividly this subject 
exhibits the glory of Christ. 

It is a great thing to make a mind, to create a creature, 
especially such a lofty creature as an angel. If a single 



86 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

soul is of more value than a world, a single angel is also ; 
and if so, to make one is greater than to make a world. 
It was a good thing, too, to give being to one capable 
of such high functions and enjoyments forever. And it 
was good and great, still more, to create myriads of them, 
— whole galaxies, boundless constellations. O what a 
sublime grandeur does it show to be the author of such 
a heavenly family ! 

The Lord Jesus Christ is that author. He created 
every angel that ever flamed and sparkled on the holy 
mountain of God. Moreover, he could not have made 
them better. There is nothing better than best. There 
is no way of constructing a mind better than in the Divine 
image, where every faculty was a faculty of the Divine 
mind, and where the proportion of those faculties is the 
same proportion as in the Divine original. Infinite Good- 
ness can do no better than to produce finite counterparts, 
fac-similes of itself. Nor could he place them better than 
in heaven, nor arrange them better than in ascending 
series, — thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, — 
the covering cherub over all, bearing on viewless wing 
the throne of Jehovah. 

He who impeaches the goodness of that first creation 
must contend that to make them worse were better ; that 
less degrees of wisdom were wiser, fainter copies of Deity 
more divine, which is absurd. 

If now the Lord Jesus Christ made all the glorious 
angels, how glorious must he be himself! If, as God, he 
formed and fashioned their loveliness, and if in his hu- 
manity he is now exalted far above all principality and 
power, how ineffable must the glory of the God-man be ! 
Uniting in himself the qualities of infinite and finite, pre- 
senting in the same person all excellences, derived and 
underived, how unspeakable must be his glory ! 

Imagine the purity of a single angel, the most obscure 



THE ANOINTED CHERUB. 87 

of the upper empyrean, — the least exalted, least intellec- 
tual, least intensely holy, — and let him enter this dark 
world, how should we fall prostrate, unable to sustain 
the vision ! 

But go up, then, far above him, rank after rank, throne 
after throne, through all the heavens, to where Jesus 
sits, principalities and powers being made subject to him, 
and what can imagination conceive of him ? But great 
as he is, he died for us. His blood was our ransom, his 
death our life ; in him we rise, his glory we share, and 
on his throne we sit for ever and ever ! 

May God strengthen us in the inner man, to be able 
with all saints to comprehend the breadth and length and 
depth and height, and to know the love of Christ that 
passeth knowledge, and be filled with all the fulness of 
God. 



CHAPTER IX 



SON OF GOD. 



" But unto the Son he saith, ' Thy throne, God, is fok ever and 
ever.'" — Heb. i. 8. 

THE angels are repeatedly called sons of God. Christ 
is, however, Son of God in a higher sense, applica- 
ble to him alone. This is his highest title ; and is ap- 
plied to him in the New Testament more than a hundred 
times, in such ways that the most casual reader must see 
that it is a title of sublime import. It is proposed to 
show, — 

1. That this title implies Deity in the person. 

2. That it was possessed antecedent to the incarnation. 
That the Son of God is a Divine title is shown by more 
passages than could be easily adduced in a brief chapter. 

John prefaces his Gospel with a statement concerning 
the Word. The Word was with God, and was God, and 
the Word was made flesh, and we saw his glory, as of 
the only begotten of the Father. Now this term, "the 
Word," was brought into use among the Jews by the 
translation of the Hebrew Scriptures which became ne- 
cessary after their return from Babylon. That translation, 
called the Chaldee paraphrase, occupied nearly the same 
place our English version does to us ; and in that para- 
phrase, in numerous instances, the name Jehovah was 
translated Word of Jehovah, of which a single instance 
may suffice. Gen. iii. 8, "And they heard the voice of 
the Lord God walking in the garden." Chaldee para- 
phrase: "And they heard the voice of the Word of the 
Lord walking in the garden." 



SON OF GOD. 89 

Now John takes this name of Jehovah in the popular 
version of the Scriptures, and says, the Word made flesh 
is the only begotten of the Father. Can we be blamed 
for thinking that Son of God is a Divine title ? And is not 
this the reason why, when Peter confessed it, Jesus said, 
" Blessed art thou, Simon ; flesh and blood hath not re- 
vealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven " ? 

When the Jews accused Christ of breaking the Sab- 
bath, by healing the impotent man, he replied, " My 
Father worketh hitherto, and I work." And his hear- 
ers understood him to mean that God was his own 
father, his as no person's else. They instantly accused 
him of blasphemy, because, being a man, he made him- 
self equal with God. What could more clearly show 
that, in their use of language, Son of God was a Divine 
title, and that to claim it was to claim Divine honors? 
It has been said that Jesus, in his reply, disclaimed any 
such idea. On the contrary, he pointedly reaffirmed 
it. If the Scripture called men gods who are not Di- 
vine, is it blasphemy to call me God who am Divine ? 
is the logic of the passage ; and the fact that they again 
attempted to stone him confirms it. Hence, in John ix. 
35, we find worship paid to that title. Christ had healed 
a blind man. Afterwards, meeting him, he said, " Dost 
thou believe on the Son of God?" He asked, "Who is 
he, Lord?" Christ replied that it was himself, and the 
man said, "Lord, I believe," and worshipped him. He 
understood the title to be Divine ; and Christ, by not re- 
buking his worship, sanctioned that idea. This is shown 
clearly, also, by the point on which Christ's trial and sen- 
tence turned. Said the high-priest, "I adjure thee by 
God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the 
Son of the living God." 

"I am," was the direct reply. At which the council 
unanimously voted him worthy of death for blasphemy. 



90 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

And at a subsequent stage of the proceeding they said, 
" We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because 
he said, I am the Son of God." 

Does, then, the law of Moses say a man claiming that 
title shall die? It does not. But there is a statute that 
whoever draws away the people to worship any other 
God than Jehovah shall be put to death. And to this 
they referred. In saying " I am the Son of God," they 
understood him as claiming Divine honors, and as they did 
not concede that claim, they passed sentence of death. 
Now Jesus knew how they understood it; and if they had 
been mistaken in thinking he claimed Divine honors, he 
would have told them. But he did not. Either, there- 
fore, he was Divine, or how can we blame them for what 
they did? Accordingly, we find that his resurrection 
to the right hand is viewed in Scripture as a justification 
of his claim to that title, as now understood. 1 Tim. iii. 
16: "God was manifest in the flesh, . . . .justified in the 
spirit." God justified ! And how, except that the Son 
of God, in his spiritual, glorious existence after the resur- 
rection, was justified in his claims in that respect ? Hence 
St. Paul (Romans i. 4) says he was declared "to be the 
Son of God with power," by his resurrection. 

Therefore it is that the earliest confession of faith con- 
tained the one all-comprehending article : "I believe that 
Jesus is the Son of God." And therefore it is not strange 
it should be written, " He that believeth not on the Son 
shall not see life " ; and again, " Whosoever shall confess 
that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and 
he in God " ; and again, " that all men should honor the 
Son even as they honor the Father." These and similar 
sayings, inexplicable on any other hypothesis, are plain 
and powerful when we know assuredly that the Son of 
God is Divine. 

It is objected, that many things are said of the Son 



SON OF GOD. 91 

of Gocl that imply limitation ; and we cheerfully concede 
that Jesus was truly man, as especially denoted by his 
other great title, Son of Man. All such intimations are 
to be accounted for by the fact of a union of two natures, 
Divine and human, in one person, to which at present we 
can only refer, and pass on to show that the title Son of 
God belonged to Christ before his incarnation. 

And here the fact of the ancient belief of the doctrine 
of eternal generation is entitled to some weight. It seems 
impossible that the Church, for so many ages, should 
have believed in a sonship antedating this world, and 
that they should have dwelt upon it so much, and felt 
such a vivid interest in it, and made it of so much im- 
portance, and yet there be no element of truth contained 
in it. It does seem at least probable that the title Son of 
Gocl belonged to Christ before, and independently of his 
being made flesh. Then consider such expressions as 
1 John iv. 9, 10: "In this was manifested the love of 
God, because that God sent his only begotten Son into 
the world." John iii. 16 : " God so loved the world that 
he gave his only begotten Son." "Do not these words," 
asks Dr. Hopkins, " seem to express the idea that there 
existed a son, an only begotten son, antecedent to his 
being sent, or given? Must he not have had a son to 
give, to send?" 

Compare, too, 1 Tim. iii. 16, " God was manifested in 
the flesh," with 1 John iii. 8, " The Son of God was 
manifested " ; and as the former obviously implies that 
God existed before his manifestation, so must not the latter 
imply that the Son of God existed previous to his mani- 
festation? And when, in Psalm ii., Messiah is represented 
as saying, "I will declare the decree the Lord hath said 
unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee," 
is it not the most natural idea, that the son was then exist- 
ing, and did declare the decree by the mouth of David? 



92 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

And that previously to such declaration the Lord had said 
unto him, " Thou art my Son " ? 

Add to this, that the title Christ and the title Son are 
evidently inseparable. Thus Peter: " Thou art the Christ, 
the Son of the living God." So the high-priest: " If thou 
be the Christ, the Son of the living God." The titles are 
plainly contemporaneous in origin. But the title Christ, 
beyond dispute, did not originate in this world. Neither 
as priest nor as king did Jesus, in the days of his flesh, 
receive anointing. Yet he was the Christ. He was 
anointed and appointed before this world ; and therefore 
he was Son of God as anciently as that. If it be objected, 
that the angel at the annunciation, after predicting his 
miraculous conception, said, " Therefore, also, that holy 
thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son 
of God," the reply is, that those words may be appropri- 
ately understood to mean that he shall be proved to be 
the Son of God by such miraculous birth. Such portent 
should be the proof of his previous sonship and anointing, 
not its cause. 

And if it be objected again, that, in Acts xiii. 33, St. 
Paul refers his sonship to his resurrection, — "God hath 
fulfilled the promise, in that he hath raised up Jesus, as 
it is written in the second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this 
day have I begotten thee," — the answer is the same. Paul 
cites his primogeniture in the resurrection as proof that he 
was that Son, anointed before in heaven, who spake, in 
Psalm ii., by the mouth of David. He sufficiently ex- 
plains his meaning in Romans i. 4 : " Declared to be the 
Son of God with power by the resurrection." That is, 
established and actually enthroned in full power as heir 
of all things to the Father. 

Before his humiliation, he was heir apparent, anointed 
and appointed, but not yet crowned ; after his humiliation, 
he is heir in possession, both anointed and crowned, God 



SON OF GOD. 93 

over all blessed forevermore. His title anointed Son 
of God, the fact that God had appointed him heir of 
all things, though not officially declared, was widely un- 
derstood through all the realms of spiritual existence, be- 
fore ever he trod this world, a man of sorrows. Therefore 
time after time we see demons at his approach begin to 
tremble, and say, " Yes, I know thee who thou art, Jesus, 
thou Son of God most high " ; and to plead with him 
not to torment them before the time. Therefore, too, 
the temptation in the wilderness strikes on that key, "if 
thou be the Son of God." Everything, from first to last, 
coincides to show that that title Son of God was a title 
brought from higher worlds, a title of tremendous import 
in those mighty realms, on which some great issues were 
suspended. 

And here let us pause awhile and reflect upon the im- 
portance of this sublime theme. To us to-day comes the 
impressive question of Jesus, "Dost thou believe on the 
Son of God?" This inquiry, in its deep spiritual import, 
is of the last importance. It is not whether we admit it 
speculatively, but whether we believe with all the heart. 

A man may aecept this as an article of faith, very much 
as he would gather a flower and press it in a book, and 
keep it pale, faded, lifeless. But to believe on the Son 
of God, so as to have God dwell in the soul, and the soul 
in God, is a higher thing than that. The man whom 
Christ had healed said, " Lord, I believe," and worshipped 
him. Can we worship the Son of God? Or are there 
some speculative doubts, some unbeliefs, or some chilly 
philosophizings, that disable worship ? It is not alone in 
ancient times that temptation strikes at the Son of God 
with an if. It is the chief point of attack in all modern 
scepticism and unsettlement of mind. Happy are they 
who with unwavering faith can kneel with Nathanael and 
say, " Thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of 
Israel " ; and with Thomas, " My Lord and my God." 



94 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

And sad and sorrowful the sight of those who hesitate, 
who falter, who deny, who cannot bow the knee, nor 
honor the Son as they honor the Father ! Sad and sor- 
rowful indeed to see men thus virtually siding with his 
judges, and saying, "He hath spoken blasphemy, he is 
worthy of death." O Spirit of God, open their eyes ! 
As at the prophet's prayer thou didst unseal the eyes of 
Gehazi to see angels around, unseal their eyes to see Him 
whom angels adore, that they may say, Of a truth, this is 
the Son of God ! 



CHAPTER X. 

ONLY BEGOTTEN. 

" This day have I begotten thee." — Psalms ii. 7. 

IT is an opinion entertained by some that God was in- 
visible to angelic eyes, and that to become visible he 
must provide himself with created organs of manifesta- 
tion. " None can see the Father immediately," observes 
President Edwards. " Christ is the image of the invisible 
God, by which he is seen by all elect creatures. None 
has ever immediately seen the Father but the Son, and 
none else sees the Father any other way than by the Son's 
revealing him." 

The question arises., then, as to the nature of the Son 
before his incarnation, whether it was simple or com- 
plex, — Divine only or Divine-human. By what organ 
or organs did the Son reveal God to celestial beings ? 
Why was the Son less invisible to celestial eyes than the 
Father ? 

Our answer is, that the person of the Son was al- 
ready complex before the incarnation. We mean, that 
the union of the Divine and human natures had already 
taken place before the Word was made flesh. The 
second person of the Trinity assumed a creature into 
personal union with himself, as his organ of manifestation. 
That creature was not an angel (Heb. ii. 16), but a glo- 
rious humanity, spiritual, incorruptible, such as ours will 
be in the resurrection. It is also conceived, that to unite 
eternally in one conscious personality two natures, infinite 
and finite, required an exertion of Omnipotence, by the 



96 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

first person of the Trinity upon the second person, in con- 
sequence of which the complex person resulting might 
figuratively be termed Son, and be said to be begotten on 
the day when that union was consummated. 

That such was in fact the complex character of the Son 
before incarnation, and such the figurative nature of his 
generation, we now proceed to prove. 

It has been shown that the title " Son of God " was 
possessed by Christ before his incarnation. We now re- 
mark, that he was not begotten from eternity, or by what 
is called an eternal generation ; but at a definite point in 
past duration, when it was said, " This day have I begot- 
ten thee." 

It has been said that " this day " means from eternity, 
because to God there is no succession, but all eternity is 
one eternal now. But this is impossible. The judgment- 
day is not to God already present. Nor with him, any 
more than with us, has one single event of to-morrow actu- 
ally come to pass. He is as certain of them as if they 
were present, but they are not present. Neither is God 
now creating the world. Nor to his mind is Noah now in 
the ark, and the flood covering the earth. Therefore^ 
when the Son, in David's time, said, " The Lord hath said 
unto me, ' This day have I begotten thee,' " he referred 
to a particular day in time then past. 

It is urged that, in Prov. viii. 22, 23, Christ, under the 
name of Wisdom, says, " I was set up from everlasting." 
But the mountains are often called everlasting. And the 
connection shows that the Son was set up from everlasting 
in the same sense, that is, before the creation of this world, 
which science shows was a kind of eternity. 

Moreover, if the Son, as God, be derived or begotten, 
he is neither self-existent nor independent. But can the 
human mind conceive a being to be truly God who is 
neither self-existent nor independent ? If the Son have 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 97 

not these attributes, he is a secondary and subordinate God, 
and nothing more. " I will not aver," says Professor 
Stuart, " that those are Arians, and deny the divinity of 
Christ, who believe this, but I must say that I could make 
no serious objection to the system of Arius if I believed 
this. The whole dispute between Arius and the Church 
turned on the difference between being begotten and 
being made." With Professor Stuart the majority of 
New England minds sympathize. Nor can the defenders 
of an eternal generation offer any reply. They either 
strip the Avords of all meaning, or boldly command us to 
believe a contradiction. 

A specimen of the former is given by Dr. Hopkins : 
" Eternal generation is infinitely above anything that re- 
lates to natural generation, and does not include any 
beginning, change, dependence, or inferiority." It is " an 
incomprehensible mystery, infinitely beyond our compre- 
hension." But this in plain English amounts to saying 
that it is no generation at all. It is a generation in no 
intelligible or conceivable sense of that word. And if so, 
it might be called marriage, or divorce, or anything else, 
just as well as generation. 

A specimen of intrepid belief of contradiction is given 
by Dr. Baird in his " Elohim Revealed," as follows : " The 
one infinite nature is communicated from the Father to 
the Son, in a generation not voluntary, but of the very 
nature of the Divine essence : a generation which is not 
occasional, but continual, which does not originate, but is 
from everlasting to everlasting, and in which each of 
those blessed persons possesses the whole infinite fulness 
of the Divine essence, — not jointly, but in common and 
undivided." 

To us this is as much a contradiction as to say that God 
is and is not at the same time ; that he had no beginning, 
and yet created himself; that his existence was necessary, 



98 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

and yet purely voluntary ; that his attributes are eternal, 
and yet that lie created himself according to a preconceived 
plan. We protest against abusing language thus. Language 
was made to express thought, not to utter contradictions. 

The doctrine of an eternal generation being thus inca- 
pable of rational statement and defence, and it having 
been proved that the title Son of God was possessed by 
Christ before incarnation, it follows that he was begotten 
at a particular point in past duration, which other scrip- 
tures fix before the foundation of this world. 

Then, on ; ' that day " the Christ, the Son of God, the 
God-man, came into existence. Then as a complex person 
he was born. Before that there had been God, and there 
had been man ; but now, first and only, there was a God- 
man, — first begotten and only begotten of the Father. 

In support of this, we appeal further to 1 Cor. xv. 47 : 
" The first man is of the earth, earthy, the second man is 
from heaven.'" On this Alford remarks, following De 
Wette : " From heaven, in his whole personality, as the 
God-man." Olshausen says it denotes the place of origin 
of the spiritual and glorious body. As Adam's natural 
body was from the earth, so Christ's spiritual body was 
from heaven. 

This is the most obvious and natural sense, which is 
to be preferred, unless strong reasons exist for allowing a 
secondary meaning. That it cannot be referred to the 
Divine nature of Christ is plain. For that would represent 
the contrast drawn by the Apostle as follows : " The first 
man was of the earth, earthy, the second man, so far as he 
was man, was of the earth also, and only so far as he was 
not man, from heaven." 

The next passage is John iii. 13 : " And no man hath 
ascended up into heaven but He that came down from 
heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven." This 
verse was not spoken by Jesus to Nicodemus, but by the 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 93 

Holy Spirit through John. This is plain from its men- 
tioning the ascension as already past. At the time of the 
conversation with Nicodemus, Jesns had not ascended up 
to heaven, for he said to Mary even after his resurrection, 
" I am not yet ascended." But at the time John wrote 
Lis Gospel, it was proper to speak of the Son of Man as 
having ascended to heaven, and being in heaven. But 
observe, that same Son of Man which had ascended 
up to heaven in John's sight the Holy Spirit here de- 
clares came down from heaven. 

Moreover, it is an established principle that the title 
Son of Man relates to the humanity of Christ. Thus Dr.. 
Emmons : " By this phrase he always meant his human- 
ity." So Dr. Hopkins: The term Son of Man is "used 
with respect to the human nature as united to the Divine." 
Dr. Knapp says, " The more proper meaning of the 
phrase Son of Man is the son of Adam, and in whatever 
way it is used, it clearly denotes the humanity of Christ." 

But there is a third passage quite as pointed. In John 
vi. 62 Christ says, " What and if ye shall see the Son 
of Man ascend up where he was before ? " Before this, 
in verse 33, he had said, " The bread of God is He that 
cometh down from heaven " ; and in verse 38, " I came 
down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will 
of Him that sent me " ; thus indicating a subordination 
of will before coming from heaven, — a subordination that 
included the act of coming itself, as one sent. Verse 41 : 
" I am the bread of life that came down from heaven." 
Verse 50 : " This is the bread that cometh down from 
heaven." Verse 51 : "I am the living bread that cometh 
down from heaven, .... and the bread that I will give 
is my flesh." Christ here declares repeatedly that his 
humanity came from heaven, closing with the significant 
question, " What and if ye shall see the Son of Man as- 
cend up where he was before ? " 



100 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

But there is one more passage equally direct, namely, 
Eph. iv. 9, 10 : " Now that he ascended, what is it but 
that he also descended first into the lower parts of the 
earth. He that descended is the same also that ascended 
up far above all heavens." Now it is certainly the plainest 
and most obvious sense to say, that the God-man who de- 
scended was the same God-man who ascended. More- 
over, the evangelical mind has in fact debarred itself from 
making the only answer that it would be likely to make, 
namely, that these passages were to be interpreted, not of 
the human, but of the Divine nature. It has taught that 
the Divine nature did not descend nor ascend, nor expe- 
rience any change whatever, — in fact, that such a thing 
was impossible. 

Thus Dr. Hopkins says, " The incarnation does not 
imply any change in him, for as God he is unchange- 
able." The incarnation, he says, was " no part of his 
humiliation." So Dr. Knapp declares, as the universally 
recognized principle of theology, that " it is not proper to 
say that the eternal Son of God left heaven, surrendered 
or renounced his glory, and condescended to suffering. 
The idea is inconsistent with the Divine glory." Accord- 
ing to this, it is a principle absolutely ..certain, that in these 
four passages it is the human nature only which is said to 
come down from heaven. It is not proper, according to 
Dr. Knapp, to say that it was anything else. 

Nearly if not quite as direct are the words of Christ in 
the sixteenth and seventeenth chapters of John. " And 

now I go my wa}^ unto Him that sent me The Father 

himself loveth you because ye have loved me, and have 

believed that I came out from God I came forth 

from the Father, and am come into the world ; again, I 

leave the world and go to the Father And now, O 

Father, glorify thou me with the glory which I had with 
thee before the world was For thou lovedst me 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 101 

before the foundation of the world." Now it cannot be 
said that only the Divine nature speaks. The Divine 
nature, according to the principle above stated, cannot 
experience any diminution of glory, or change of any kind. 
It must be, therefore, on orthodox grounds, the human 
spirit that speaks of a glory and a love of the Father 
before the foundation of the world. 

We next refer to Hebrews i. 3, compared with 2 Co- 
rinthians iv. 4 and Colossians i. 15. 

In the former, Christ before his incarnation is spoken 
of as " being the brightness of the Father's glory, and ex- 
press image of his person," — terms implying infinite and 
finite natures conjoined, since without a created nature 
there could be no image or reflection, and without an infi- 
nite nature the image and reflection could not be adequate. 
In the parallel passages Christ, before his incarnation, is 
called "the image of the invisible God," an expression 
concerning which the same remarks may be made. The 
God-man, before being made flesh, was the image of the 
Invisible. And of him it might be said, without deroga- 
tion from his Deity on the one hand or his essential hu- 
manity on the other, that he was appointed heir of all 
things, and that by him God made the worlds. In virtue 
of his celestial humanity, he could be appointed heir. In 
virtue of his Deity he could create worlds. 

The argument is completed by a reference to the the- 
ophanies of the Old Testament. A glorious being, in 
repeated instances, appeared to the patriarchs, who was 
called Jehovah, and at the same time was called man. 

For instance, Genesis xviii., it says, " Jehovah appeared 
unto Abraham, .... and he lifted up his eyes and looked, 
and lo, three men stood at the door of his tent." And lest 
it should be objected that they were mere appearances, 
and not real men, the Holy Spirit goes on to relate the 
washing of their feet, and their eating and drinking. 



102 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Now it is interesting to notice that the being who here 
appeared, gave to Abraham the same evidence of his per- 
sonal identity as a man that he gave his disciples after 
his resurrection. "Handle me," he said, "and see, for a 
spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." And 
he said, "Have ye here any meat? .... And he did eat 
before them." Now, if these signs proved that it was no 
mere phantom, or optical illusion, after the resurrection, 
they proved the same before. Abraham handled Christ 
in washing his feet, and Christ ate before him. 

Here let us call to mind what Jesus once said of the 
patriarch : " Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he 
saw it and was glad." Abraham saw his day by seeing 
a specimen of it. He saw the God-man on earth, and 
saw him eat and drink, just as the disciples did, and talked 
with him as they did. That was, in a sense, "seeing his 
day." And glad was Abraham to see it. 

It is also to be noticed that, when the angels came to 
Sodom in the evening, Lot received them as men, and 
baked unleavened bread, and they ate. And afterward, 
when Lot went out to the mob, and his life was in danger, 
it says, " The men put forth their hand and pulled Lot into 
the house." Now one of these is the same that Abraham 
had recognized. Lot recognizes him also, and begs that 
Zoar may be spared ; and the reply is, " Haste thee, es- 
cape thither, for I cannot do anything till thou be come 
thither." 

Thus, throughout this wonderful transaction, a being 
appears who is identified as God and as man, by the very 
signs Christ afterwards gave to his disciples. The body 
he had was a celestial body, capable of assuming all the 
properties and performing all the functions of flesh and 
blood at will, yet without coming under the bondage of 
corruption. That bondage to corruption was to be con- 
sequent on the humiliation, the real imprisonment in flesh 
and blood. 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 103 

Another instance of his appearing as a man is recorded 
Genesis xxxii. 24: "And Jacob was left alone, and there 
wrestled a man with him till the break of day." That 
this was no dream is proved from the fact that his thigh 
was put out of joint, so that he " halted on his thigh." 
Yet that man was God, and Jacob named the place Peni 
El, Face of God, because, said he, " I have seen God face 
to face." Yet Jacob had felt the grasp of a man, not a 
shadow ; and we do but follow the literal sense of the 
narrative, when we say that that mysterious personage 
was the God-man. 

This same person it is who, when requested by Moses 
to show him his glory, told him he could not see his face 
and live, but, hiding him in a cleft of the rock, and cover- 
ing him with his hand, he would pass by and take away 
his hand, and he should see his back parts. Yet, when 
he thus passed by and proclaimed his glory, it was "the 
Lord, the Lord God." On this President Edwards re- 
marks: " What he saw was doubtless the back parts of a 
glorious human form in which Christ appeared to him, in 
all likelihood the form of his glorified human nature in 
which he should afterwards appear; for it is not to be 
supposed that any man could subsist under a sight of 
the glory of Christ's human nature as it now appears." 
Compare with this last remark the effect upon Paul when 
that same glorified form shone out upon him " with a light 
above the brightness of the sun," causing him to fall pros- 
trate upon the earth. 

Another case is mentioned in Joshua v. One day, short- 
ly before the taking of Jericho, as Joshua was reconnoi- 
tring, he saw a man with a drawn sword in his hand. And 
so thoroughly real was the man, that Joshua challenged 
him, and asked on which side he belonged. The man 
replied, "Nay, but as Captain of the Lord's host am I 
now come." Immediately Joshua fell prostrate. And 



104 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the Captain of the Lord's host told him to loose his shoe 
off his foot, for the place was holy, and immediately it 
adds, "And Jehovah said unto Joshua." Thus this person 
is called man, and Jehovah, and the Captain of Jehovah's 
host; the latter expression equivalent to that of Daniel, 
" Michael, the first of the chief princes." This, then, is 
the God-man, the Captain of our salvation. 

Isaiah says, " I saw Jehovah sitting upon a throne high 
and lifted up, and his train filled the temple." Yet John 
declares that " these things spake Isaiah of Christ, when 
he saw his glory and wrote of him." 

Ezekiel also describes on the cherubic throne the form 
of a man, of intense effulgence ; and immediately after, 
says this " was the appearance of the glory of Jehovah." 

Daniel also gives a description of Michael, "the first of 
the chief princes," which description is almost identical 
with that of Christ in the opening of the Apocalypse. 
The Reformers generally regarded Michael as one of the 
names of Christ. Fairbairn argues conclusively in support 
of that idea. And yet St. Jude calls Michael " the arch- 
angel," and says he durst not bring a railing accusation 
against the Devil. How could that be said of absolute 
Deity ? Evidently it is the God-man who, in virtue of his 
creature form and standing, could be bound by the eti- 
quette of the celestial court ; so that it might be said, he 
dared not violate its proprieties." 

A single incident more and we have done. Let us 
ascend awhile the mount of transfiguration. There we 
behold one moment the Son of Mary, a man of sorrows 
in the ordinary garb of flesh and blood. The next mo- 
ment the fashion of his countenance is altered ; his face 
shines like the sun ; his raiment is white and glistering, 
like the snow. And what is this metamorphosis but the 
disguise for a moment laid off, and the inner glory shining 
out ? The same glorious person before whom the prophets 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 105 

fell as dead, whom Moses could not see and live, has been 
present all the while, but under disguise. Now the pent- 
up glories rush out in a flood of splendor. This is the 
man from heaven, the God-man, this is the very same 
that descended and shall ascend. But lo, while we gaze 
those fires are quenched, those intense and burning glories 
are absorbed, the disguise is assumed again, and the body 
of humiliation alone meets our eye. Yet we know that 
under that disguise that same immortal beauty still exists, 
only veiled and hidden, capable at any moment of again 
bursting forth with ineffable brightness. 

It is proper, before leaving the subject, to look at some 
objections. We take them as best presented by Dr. 
Hopkins. 

This idea of the person of the God-man having been 
constituted before incarnation, he says " is inconsistent 

with the true and real manhood of Jesus Christ If 

the creature who took a body by incarnation were the 
first and greatest creature that was ever created, he was 
no more a man than the angels." 

We reply, this objection might have some force against 
the view as held by Dr. Watts, in his work entitled " Tho 
Glory of Christ," but not against the view now presented. 
Dr. Watts supposed, and gave great prominence to the 
idea, that the creature in question was first and highest. 
Such, however, is not the view defended here. The crea- 
ture element in the person of the God-man, on the present 
supposition, is neither first-created in the order of time, 
nor of angelic race, but created in heaven, and created 
human, like other glorified human spirits. Against this 
view the objection loses its force. The objector cannot 
deny that God could, if he pleased, create a true and 
proper reasonable human soul in that way as well as in 
any other, and give it a celestial body, such as the saints 
are to have in heaven. 

5* 



106 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Dr. Hopkins objects, in the second place, " if the body 
only of Jesus Christ came into existence, or was formed 
in the womb of the Virgin Mary, he could not be really 
her son. She who conceives and brings forth a son is 
as really and as much the mother of his soul as of his 
body." 

We reply, the objection rests upon a pure assumption, 
without proof, either of what is called traduction or of con- 
creation of souls. Neither is self-evident. Neither is re- 
vealed. Neither is a doctrine in which the Church is 
agreed. A large and influential class of minds, repre- 
sented by Professor Shedd and Dr. Baird, reject the 
theory of concreation, and assert that the majority of the 
Church in all ages have rejected it. 

On the other hand, all new-school men, and that class 
of old-school men represented by Princeton, make war 
upon the theory of traduction as improbable, absurd, inca- 
pable of proof. The Princeton Review even goes so far 
as to say the theory of pre-existence is " clear sunshine " 
in comparison. 

Doddridge says : " The weakness of the former (traduc- 
tion) hypothesis is the principal strength of this (concrea- 
tion) On the whole, it seems that the latter is rather 

the most probable, but it does not become us to be confi- 
dent in so dark and dubious a matter." 

Evidently the objection is of no force. The objector 
must first prove the truth of traduction, or of concreation, 
before he can base an objection upon them. To reason 
from an unsettled, disputed general law against a specific 
teaching of Scripture, is " to make the word of God of 
none effect by human tradition." 

The third objection of Dr. Hopkins is, " that it is the way 
and manner of the Governor of the world, first to put his 
creatures upon trial before admitting them to glory ; but 
to make a creature and set him above everv other crea- 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 107 

ture, without previous trial, would be contrary to God's 
way of dealing." 

We admit the premise, but deny the conclusion. The 
principle is important, and against the view defended by 
Dr. Watts, which Hopkins was opposing, would have 
force. But the view now maintained is that Christ, 
though appointed and anointed to the headship of the 
universe, was not invested with it until after his resur- 
rection. His humiliation was his trial, an ordeal the 
most severe ever known in the universe. Then, when 
perfected through sufferings, he was " declared the Son 
of God with power." 

But it is objected, " Such a view is useless and unrea- 
sonable." 

To this we reply, that no truth is useless that sheds 
light upon the object of Christ's death, that shows us the 
nature of that power of death he must destroy, and ex- 
plains the principles on which he enabled God to be just 
in the punishment of Satan, without a morbid reaction of 
public sympathy in his favor. Any truth that clears up 
that whole subject is neither unreasonable nor useless, 
but a part of the " wisdom of God and power of God 
unto salvation." 

But it is objected, finally, that it is dangerous as tending 
to Unitarianism. But, did time permit, it could be fully 
shown that the fact is the reverse of this. That it is for 
the lack of a clear perception of the two natures in one 
person of the Word before incarnation that Unitarianism 
has again and again developed itself in the very focus of 
evangelical light. 

Arius developed his system in the bosom of the primi- 
tive Church. Socinus was a product of the Reformation, 
as really as Luther or Calvin. English Unitarianism is 
of Presbyterian lineage ; and the latest, most luxuriant 
growth of that system was in New England with Boston 



108 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

for its centre, the heart of Puritanism where Evangelical 
ideas had at first undisputed possession. 

The germs of Unitarianism are in the Evangelical system 
itself, as it has been developed in all ages. Says Pro- 
fessor Stuart : " The ancient Fathers taught, almost with 
one voice, that Christ was derived from the Father, .... 
they did really and truly regard the Word as an emana- 
tion from the Father. Most of the earlier ones, an ema- 
nation which took place just before time began." 

But if they had understood that the Word had two 
natures before being made flesh, they would have escaped 
this mistake. They would have ascribed to Him all crea- 
ture attributes in virtue of the one and all Divine attri- 
butes in virtue of the other. But once they allowed only 
a single nature in the pre-incarnate Word, and predicated 
derivation or emanation of that, Arianism was the natural 
result. The only difference was the difference between 
"begotten" and "made." They said "begotten" Arius 
said " made" In constructing a defence against Arius, the 
Church developed the doctrine of two natures in one per- 
son after the incarnation, at the same time throwing the 
generation back to eternity. But while by this device 
the Church made head against Arianism, at the same time 
the premises of the Socinian system were laid. It was 
expressly denied that the Divine nature suffered or could 
suffer any diminution of glory or of exaltation by the in- 
carnation. And thus, in reality, it was denied that the 
Divine nature did descend from heaven. With equal pos- 
itiveness it was denied that the human nature descended. 
All that was necessary for Socinus to do was to draw the 
logical conclusion that, since the Deity could not, and the 
humanity did not, descend from heaven, nothing descend- 
ed, and Jesus was only a man like other men, commen- 
cing his existence in the womb of Maiy. 

If the Church had allowed either nature really and 



ONLY BEGOTTEN. 109 

truly to have descended, and undergone a true humiliation, 
Socinianism would not have existed. The Church taught 
Socinianism for centuries before Socinus was born. Mod- 
ern Unitarianism has done nothing but vibrate uneasily 
between Arius and Socinus, making Christ either a super- 
angelic creature or a mere man, and in both cases justify- 
ing themselves on the Catholic principle that the Divine 
nature is incapable of change. 

" Do you mean," says Dr. Channing, " that the great 
God who never changes, whose happiness is the same yes- 
terday, to-day, and forever, that this eternal Being really 
suffered and died? Every pious man, when pressed by 
the question, answers no." 

Unfortunately, every pious man had been taught to say 
no by the whole Church for ages. As Dr. Knapp ob- 
serves, "it is not proper to say that the eternal Son of God 
left heaven, or surrendered his glory." But so long as 
every pious man answered no, Unitarianism was logically 
established. For the Church said that the eternal God 
did not really leave heaven and lay aside glory, or suffer 
change, and Unitarianism itself could say no more. 

The roots of Arian and Unitarian development have 
laid in this denial, and in the fact that the Scriptures as 
undeniably predicate creature qualities of Christ before 
his incarnation as after. 

But the view now maintained logically cuts off those 
roots, and if it were generally accepted and incorporated 
in Evangelical belief, although Unitarianism might still 
exist on the outside, it could never again spring to life, as 
it always has done before, in the very heart of the Evan- 
gelical system. 

At the same time, as the discussion goes on, it will be 
found that Christ is invested with new charms and attrac- 
tions, not only in the future and in the present, nor in 
his earthly life merely, but in that vast period of time 



110 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

preceding, in which to most minds he is but a vague and 
shadowy being. 

Whatever distinctness of conception we have of Jesus, 
the God-man on earth, — whatever vividness of vision our 
spirits have attained of his glorified and exalted state, and 
of his person, as faintly described to us in the transfigura- 
tion scene, — that same distinctness we may carry back 
with us into the previous ages, thus realizing afresh the 
truth, " Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and for- 
ever." 

In the yesterday of his pre-incarnate being, in the to-day 
of his fleshly humiliation, and in the glorious to-morrow 
of his sacerdotal and kingly exaltation, he is indeed the 
same person, — God and man united, infinite and finite, 
invisible and ineffable spirit in and through a glorious, 
incorruptible, and powerful corporeity. 

The form which Jesus now wears, though indeed the 
same he had when, " being in the form of God, he thought 
it no robbery to be equal with God," yet bears, as even 
celestial bodies can, the marks and traces of an earthly 
experience. In that immortal and incorruptible hand 
there is the scar of a nail. In that side will forever be 
the mark of the spear. And to all eternity, even on that 
brow of inexpressible glory, outshining the sun, and worthy 
of many crowns, will yet be visible to the redeemed eye 
the print of the crown of thorns. 

May it be ours, with immortal vision, to behold those 
vestiges of his dying love, and cast our crowns at his 
feet! 



CHAPTER XI. 

THE FIRST-BORN. 
" The first-born of every creature." — Col. i. 15. 

IN this passage the birthright of the universe is assigned 
to Christ, as both God and man in one person. As 
God he created all things, and is the rightful Lord of all ; 
as man he obtained the heirship of all things by his suffer- 
ings, as implied in the phrase elsewhere used, " First-born 
from the dead." For both these reasons, the one Christ, 
in virtue of his two distinct natures, is figuratively called 
first-born, as being heir of universal dominion. 

Figuratively, I say, not literally. Literally the Divine 
nature could not inherit, for that implies inferiority. Lit- 
erally his human nature could not, for it was not first 
created. On the contrary, the covering cherub, or Luci- 
fer, was the natural and literal heir. It is figuratively, 
then, and by substitution, that the person in either nature 
is called first-born. And the meaning is, that the person 
so named was in his human nature exalted to the head 
of the universe as king, and invested with all the rights of 
primogeniture, as if he had been the natural first-born of 
the Father. 

In other words, the primogeniture here and in other 
parts of the New Testament assigned to Christ, considered 
as God-man and mediator, is substitutionary, and conse- 
quent upon the forfeiture of the natural heir. 

The birthright was anciently of great importance. Its 
advantages were three. The first-born, under the patri- 
archal system, became the priest of the family, or tribe, 



112 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

received a double portion of the property, and succeeded 
to the official station of the father. The antiquity of this 
custom is so great, that, like the institution of sacrifice, it 
seems to have come from the Creator. It was expressly 
recognized by the Mosaic Law as already existing. To 
guard that sacredness, in cases where a man had two 
wives unequally loved, and the oldest son by the least 
favored, Moses says, " He may not make the son of the 
beloved first-born before the son of the hated, which is 
indeed first-born." 

The value among ancient nations of this institution we, 
with our habits, can little appreciate. In this country 
primogeniture has been abolished, and our minds have lost 
all associations connected therewith. We must enter into 
Oriental habits of thought, take up their associations, and 
see and feel with their sensibilities. Yet, with all the 
sacredness of the birthright, we find in the line of promise 
a series of twelve or thirteen substitutions of the younger 
for the elder, in such a marked and prominent manner 
as seems evidently the result of studied design, especially 
as in repeated instances the substituted person is an ac- 
knowledged type of Messiah. 

Let us look, then, at the case of Cain and Abel. The 
impression we have gained from studying all that is said 
in Scripture of this case, is that it was an instance of trial 
by sacrifice to settle some question that had arisen. We 
conceive it to have been an appeal to God by sacrifice, to 
obtain his judgment. It was somewhat like that in after 
days on Carmel, between Elijah and the prophets of the 
groves, when God answered by fire. We can think of no 
objection to this idea, and derive much benefit from its 
admission. 

As to the question to be decided between the two 
brothers, various indications point to the question of the 
birthright. From the promise of a seed made to Adam 



THE FIRST-BORN 113 

and Eve, from Eve's words on Cain's birth, " I have 
begotten the man Jehovah," and from her words on the 
birth of Seth, " God hath appointed me another seed in- 
stead of Abel, whom Cain slew," the most probable idea 
is, that it was a question which of the two was the line of 
the promised seed, in which lay the birthright, which, as 
Paul says of Abraham, should be heir of the world. 

The question of birthright to the world, somehow came 
up. To settle it a trial by sacrifice was appointed, and 
God decided in favor of the younger. Then came jeal- 
ousy, rage, and murder ; and Cain, " who was of that 
wicked one," is driven from the presence of the Lord. 
And whose is the birthright ? It is given to Seth, 
" another seed instead of Abel." 

Now the word Cain means begotten, as if to say first- 
born, and the word Seth means appointed; and the whole 
drama is this : The natural first-born is rejected as unfit, 
and the appointed heir takes the birthright. 

Hence the blood of Abel typifies the blood of Christ, 
because the whole scene was a designed picture of the 
facts out of which Christ's death sprung. Lucifer was 
first heir of empire ; he proved unfit ; God substituted 
Christ; Satan through jealousy slew him. Thus the 
blood of Abel and the blood of Christ are type and anti- 
type. And you will notice here that Cain was rejected 
for cause assigned, not arbitrarily. Cain did not become 
evil because he was rejected, but he was rejected because 
he was evil, and on that rejection his evil character blazed 
out. This appears from what God said to him : " If thou 
doest well, shalt thou not be accepted ? and if thou doest 
not well, sin lieth at the door." 

If you had done well, you would have been accepted ; 
if you have forfeited your birthright, it is your own fault. 
So the Apostle John says : " And wherefore slew he him ? 
because his own works were evil and his brother's right- 



114 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

eous." That is his past conduct, his habits. It was 
because he conducted himself improperly that he was re- 
jected, and another substituted in the birthright. 

Thus studied, this whole scene close by Eden's gates 
will be found full of meaning. Nor can any man say why 
such a thing should have happened, in such a conspicuous 
place, and in such a significant way, unless by a studied 
design on the part of God. 

Let us come down, then, to Abraham, where the same 
great question of the promised seed is so prominent. More 
is said about Isaac as type of Christ almost than of any 
other person, except David. And as if to make the type 
as vivid as possible, God sends Abraham to Mount Mo- 
riah, as yet an uninhabited wilderness, and makes him 
build an altar and offer up Isaac, and the interruption of 
the sacrifice Paul calls a figure of the resurrection. 

Here then, again, the question of the birthright meets 
us in the very focus of ancient types. Abraham, " the 
heir of the world " ; Ishmael his eldest son, the son of a 
bondwoman, an Egyptian who insults her mistress, the 
boy himself mocking, then cast out, becoming a wild man, 
dwelling in the desert, his hand against every man and 
every man's hand against him ; while Isaac, the type of 
Christ, assumes the birthright. Can this be accidental ? 
Is it not a manifest contrivance of the Divine Providence ? 
The rejection of Ishmael was evidently planned by God 
from the first, before either of the lads were born ; and 
it is only in a dim and shadowy way that unfitness is 
indicated in Ishmael, not real unfitness, but a kind of in- 
direct and shadowy unfitness, by his Egyptian blood, his 
mother's insolence, and his mockery ; things not so very 
criminal as they are suggestive and emblematic. That 
this whole transaction was of the nature of symbol, or 
analogic resemblance, Paul expressly declares, Galatians 
iv. 24: "Which things are an allegory." 



THE FIRST-BORN. 115 

The next case is almost equally prominent in Scrip- 
ture, that of Esau and Jacob ; and on it from first to last 
are stamped marks of design. The children struggle in 
the womb ; God tells the mother that two nations are in 
her womb ; that the elder shall serve the younger. And 
on this Paul remarks, that " the children being not yet 
born, nor having yet done good or evil, that the purpose 
of God might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth, 
it was said unto her, ' The elder shall serve the younger,' " 
That is, this was said beforehand, in order that the pur- 
pose of God, that is, his design in the typical transaction, 
" might stand," that is, be seen to stand, " not of works," 
that is, not as conditioned on the works of the parties, 
"but of Him that calleth," that is, of his own conscious 
design before the works occurred. God not only designed 
beforehand that there should be such a substitution of the 
birthright, but also providentially ordered the circum- 
stances and the dispositions out of which by their own 
free agency that transfer actually came. In short, he pur- 
posely fitted up the stage, and put two admirable actors on 
it, to act out a higher reality. 

Paul does not say that the purpose of God was that the 
transfer should be without reference to works ; for if that 
were the Divine purpose, it was frustrated, as Paul himself 
shows when he calls Esau a profane person who sold his 
birthright, and says, " He found no place of repentance, 
though he sought it diligently with tears." Evidently the 
Holy Spirit meant to indicate that Esau's sale of his birth- 
right was not only a fault and a profanation, but an irrep- 
arable one. All that is meant, then, by the purpose of 
God not standing in works is this, that the purpose pre- 
ceded the works and occasioned their typical character, 
and did not follow them as an afterthought. 

Look, then, at the tableau purposely appointed before- 
hand by Divine contrivance. See how by the circum- 



116 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

stances before and at birth the suggestion is made of a 
conflict begun in former worlds and brought for settlement 
to this. Then notice the different costumes of the actors, 
as they are born and grow up. The one red, or dark- 
complexioned, hairy as a goat, wild and savage in his 
tastes ; the other blonde, smooth, of civilized tastes and 
habits. 

God has made them up for their parts ; he has dressed 
them in character ; and now the play begins. Esau, for a 
morsel of meat sells his birthright. Jacob, disguised in 
skins, and putting on Esau's clothes, obtains the blessing 
of the first-born. Esau cries with an exceeding loud and 
bitter cry, and lifts up his voice and weeps. Jacob flies 
from his jealous revenge, and, for ages after, the descend- 
ants of Esau are bitter foes of Israel. And the prince 
of Idumsea, like the princes of Tyre and Babylon, is ad- 
dressed by the Holy Spirit with words which pass beyond 
the mortal, and fasten upon the unseen reality. 

Jacob's typical act is sinful, but done for the sake of his 
mother, who says, " On me be thy sin, my son " ; Christ 
bore an imputed guilt, not real, for his bride, the Church, 
to whom the real sin actually belonged. Jacob gained a 
temporal birthright by seeming to be Esau ; Christ gained 
an eternal birthright by being made sin for us. " He hath 
Beelzebub," they said, "he deceiveth the people; he hath 
spoken blasphemy." 

The same substitution is briefly hinted at a fourth time 
in the birth of Pharez, one of the ancestors of Messiah, as 
recorded Genesis xxxviii. 27 - 30 : " And it came to pass 
in the time of her travail [Tamar], that, behold, twins 
were in her womb. And it came to pass, when she trav- 
ailed, that the one put out his hand ; and the midwife took 
and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, Tins 
came out first. And it came to pass, as he drew back his 
hand, that, behold, his brother came out ; and she said, 



THE FIRST-BORN. 117 

How hast thou broken forth ? this breach be upon thee : 
therefore his name was called Pharez [breach]. And 
afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread 
upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah." 

We come then to the case of Joseph. All remember 
his dreams, — how his brothers' sheaves bowed to his sheaf, 
and the sun, moon, and stars made obeisance to him. All 
remember how his brethren interpreted these of the birth- 
right, — " Shalt thou indeed have dominion over us ? " — 
and how they envied him and hated him ; how they cast 
him into a pit, and sold him to Egypt, and made Jacob 
think him torn of wild beasts. All remember how in 
Egypt Joseph was tempted, imprisoned, exalted, — in all 
things a most eminent type of Christ. 

Now listen to the dying Israel, Gen. xlix. 3, 4 : " Reu- 
ben, thou art my first-born, my might, and the beginning 
of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excel- 
lency of power. Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel ; 
because thou wentest up to thy father's bed ; then de- 
filedst thou it." At the same time, on Joseph, verses 
22-26, he pronounces the blessing proper to the first- 
born, as we read 1 Chronicles v. 1 : " Reuben was the 
first-born, but forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, 
his birthright was given to Joseph." 

But, as if not content with this fifth illustration, and as 
if the Divine purpose would seize every available opportu- 
nity to indicate this great idea, it is a sixth time repeated 
in the case of Joseph's two sons. 

When they came to receive their grandfather's blessing, 
it says : " Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right 
hand towards Israel's left, and Manasseh in his left hand 
towards Israel's right; and Israel stretched out his right 
hand and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the 
younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guid- 
ing his hands wittingly, for Manasseh was the first-born." 



118 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

That is, he crossed his hands wittingly, intentionally. 
Hence when Joseph cried, " Not so, my father, this is 
the first-born " ; "I know it, my son, I know it," said the 
dying Israel, " he shall be great, but truly his younger 
brother shall be greater than he ; and he set Ephraim 
before Manasseh." 

The seventh case is the substitution of Israel, nationally 
considered, in place of Egypt, as first-born among nations. 

Egypt was a splendid monarchy when Jacob was a 
wandering shepherd. In arts, arms, and learning Egypt 
enjoyed a kind of precedence, so that she is said to have 
been the first among the kingdoms. But now Egypt is 
rejected, and smitten with plague after plague, while God 
says, " Israel is my son, even my first-born." 

Connected with this, and forming the eighth of the se- 
ries, is the passing over the first-born of Israel on account 
of the blood sprinkled on the door-post and lintel, on the 
night when the Lord smote all the first-born of the land 
of Egypt. 

Here the substitution through sacrifice of the first-born 
of a younger nation for the first-born of an older nation is 
most marked, and its typical design manifest. The blood 
denotes the blood of Christ. The first-born of Israel typ- 
ify "the Church of the First-born" (TrpwTOTOicwv^. Of 
what, then, are the first-born of Egypt a type, but of those 
angelic principalities and powers whose defection, as Au- 
gustine says, the Church is to replace and make good? 
Can one half the transaction be made typical, and not the 
other ? Can one extreme of the contrast sustain a sym- 
bolic character, and not the other ? And yet this, as all 
Christians of all ages allow, is the very central type of 
redemption. 

The ninth instance follows soon after the exodus, in the 
case of Nadab and Abihu. In Numbers iii. 2, we read 
that Nadab was Aaron's first-born, and, verse 4, " Nadab 



THE FIRST-BORN. 119 

and Abihu died before the Lord, when they had strange 
fire ; and they had no children ; and Eleazar and Ithamar 
ministered in the priest's office." Now, considering that 
the Levitieal tribe had just been taken for the Passover 
first-born, this repetition is worthy of notice ; as if the Holy 
Spirit would keep up the idea, by constant reiteration, in 
every form and circumstance. Here it is a kind of sacer- 
dotal birthright that is forfeited by the elder and bestowed 
on the younger ; and in this case, as a marked effect of 
malversation in office. 

The tenth case is the rejection of Saul and his family, 
and the anointing of a successor from the family of Jesse. 

Dr. Fairbairn says : " ISTo one who admits the existence 
of types at all in the Old Testament will doubt .... that 
God ordered the events connected with the establishment 
of monarchy in Israel in such a manner as to render 
them exactly typical of Messiah's history." The same 
writer affirms that it was just because the events of Da- 
vid's life were typical that the words he uttered could 
furnish the form of Messianic prophecy. 

But how can David's history be typical, and Saul's his- 
tory not in some degree partake of the typical character ? 
How can David's sufferings be, as it were, the sufferings of 
Christ, and Saul, who inflicted those sufferings on David, 
not be a shadow of him who was to bruise the heel of the 
promised seed? 

Look at Saul, and see if you can resist the impression 
of design on the part of God. A head and shoulders 
above the people, of comely appearance, energetic, brave, 
moderate at first, reigning well for two years. See him 
then raising a standing army, developing an ambitious 
spirit, growing insubordinate, grasping at the sacerdotal 
function, consolidating power in himself. Hear him sol- 
emnly warned of God of removal in case of persistence in 
misconduct. Instead of submission, see him disobey again 



120 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

in the matter of Amalek, to propitiate the favor of his 
soldiery. Behold him immediately set aside ; sentence 
of forfeiture pronounced. And, though still acting sov- 
ereign, though still treated with reverence as the Lord's 
anointed, see Samuel sent to Bethlehem to anoint a suc- 
cessor. Saul had a son. God might have taken him. 
No. There must be a change of family. 

But there is another exemplification in the house of 
Jesse. For it seems as though the Holy Spirit could 
hardly repeat the indication too often. Eliab was Jesse's 
first-born, David his youngest. And when they went to 
the anointing festival, David was left out keeping sheep. 
But, to the amazement of all, the Lord rejected one after 
another of seven sons, and made them send for the shep- 
herd-boy, and as soon as he appeared, ruddy and rosy, 
" Up," said the spirit, " anoint him, for this is he." 

Follow, then, the drama to its denouement. Observe 
the jealousy of Saul, his growing hostility, his deadly jav- 
elin thrusts, his persecutions of David, his defeat, despair, 
and desperate end. 

If God had designed to give us a type of Lucifer's career, 
could he have offered one more darkly eloquent, more 
awfully instructive ? Notice how David's typical suffer- 
ings, burial in Engedi, resurrection, and Messianic psalms 
grew out of this pressure of Saul's inflamed jealousy and 
revenge. 

If now the sufferings of Christ are typified by the suf- 
ferings of David, how can it not be true that the jealous 
revenge and malice of Satan, that caused those sufferings, 
were typified by the jealous revenge of Saul ? How can 
David's anguish at Saul's unjust persecution be a type, and 
not the unjust persecution itself be a type ? 

The mind of President Edwards was not averse to such 
a style of reasoning from types. Coincidences and analo- 
gies of this nature did not seem to his calm and philosophic 
mind unworthy of attention. 



THE FIRST-BORN 121 

" It is observable that God anointed David after Saul, 
to reign in his room. He took away the crown from him 
and his family, who was higher in stature than any of his 
people, and was in their eyes fittest to bear rule, to give it 
to David, who was of low stature, and in comparison of 
despicable appearance. So God was pleased to show how 
Christ, who appeared despicable, without form or come- 
liness, and was despised and rejected of men, should take 
the kingdom from the great ones of the earth. 

" And also it is observable that David was the youngest 
of Jesse's sons, as Jacob the younger brother supplanted 
Esau, and got the birthright and blessing from him ; and 
as Pharez, another of Christ's ancestors, supplanted Zarah 
in the birth ; and as Isaac, another of the ancestors of 
Christ, cast out his elder brother Ishmael, thus was that 
frequent saying of Christ fulfilled, ' The last shall be first, 
and the first last.' " 1 

And here a twelfth instance meets us. It is remarked 
by Dr. Fairbairn, that, to complete the typical outline of 
Christ's career, the reign of Solomon must come in. 
David represents more prominently the suffering Messiah, 
Solomon, Messiah victorious and exalted. 

The Holy Spirit seizes the opportunity to throw in 
another tableau of substitution. Adonijah is David's first- 
born. But the crown, by special appointment, is given to 
Solomon. Instantly Adonijah begins to plot with Joab 
and the high-priest a revolution. The queen-dowager is 
sent to demand the hand of Abishag the Shunamite for 
Adonijah in marriage. The keen eye of Solomon pen- 
etrated the design, and crushed it in a moment. " Ask 
for him the kingdom also, for he is my elder brother." 

Finally, this principle of substitution is again worked out 
on a large scale in the rejection of the Jews and calling 
of the Gentiles. As compared with Egypt, Israel was an 
1 Works, Vol. I. p. 349. 



122 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

adopted or substituted first-born ; but as compared with 
the Christian Church, Israel stands as the disinherited elder 
brother. To them pertained, says Paul, the adoption, — 
that is, the birthright of nations, — but God has given it to 
the Gentiles, as Moses said, " I will move them to jealousy 
by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation will 
I anger them." How angry and how jealous were the 
Jews when Christ hinted at their rejection ! And when 
the natural branches were broken off, and the wild grafted 
in, what fierce, persecuting rage did Judaism show ! 

And in doing this, Paul teaches, in Galatians iv., that 
the nation was a type of the same kind and meaning as 
Ishmael of old. Which things, he says, are an allegory. 
Jerusalem that now is, and her children, answereth to, that 
is, is a type of the same meaning with, Hagar, and Ishmael 
the son of the bondwoman. Thus in thirteen successive 
instances is the principle of a substituted birthright or 
an adoptive primogeniture illustrated ; and in all but two 
of them we have Scripture warrant, plain and clear, for 
regarding them as purposely typical of the substitution of 
Christ. 

What else can they be ? Is it possible to conceive of 
such things happening thirteen times, in the very focus 
of typical light, by chance ? We might as well say the 
world was made by chance, or that the Bible was written 
by chance. To deny such marks of design as lie in these 
cases, especially when positively asserted and argued by 
Paul, would be fatal to all reasoning from design to a 
designer, and would overturn the foundations of revelation. 
Therefore, the result is as sure as revelation is sure, and 
what overturns one, logically and consistently applied, must 
overturn the other. Hence, in fact, the Bible has had the 
effect on the human mind to instil this belief to some 
extent. With a single exception, namely, that the anoint- 
ing of Christ has been looked at as the cause of Satan's 



THE FIRST-BORN. 123 

apostasy, instead of as being occasioned by it, this may 
almost be affirmed to be the universal belief. 

Dr. Ellicott, in his Sermons on the Destiny of the Crea- 
ture, says : " The scattered hints and speculations of the 
earlier writers, afterwards more fully developed by some of 
the deeper thinkers of the seventh century, that regard 
the early history of the world and the fall of angels in some 
sort of connection, are certainly not unworthy of our con- 
sideration." Augustine speaks of the " partem hominum 
reparatum," the saved of the human race, as " designed 
to supply the place of the lapsed angels." 

From these ancient sources it is probable that Mahomet 
borrowed the idea, as he did many other things, only put- 
ting Adam instead of Christ, the first Adam for the second. 

Thus the Koran says : " When the Lord said unto the 
angels, I am going to place a substitute on earth, worship 
Adam, they all worshipped him except Eblis, who, know- 
ing that God had destined man as his superior, took a 
secret resolution never to acknowledge him as such." 

Milton describes the summoning of the angelic hosts 
and the public anointing of Christ as Head over all, and 
adds : — 

" So spake the Omnipotent, and with his words 
All seemed well pleased, but were not all. 

Satan — so call him now, his former name 

Is heard no more in heaven — He of the first, 

If not the first archangel, great in power, 

In favor, and pre-eminence, yet fraught 

With envy against the Son of God, that day 

Honored by his great Father, and proclaimed 

Messiah, King anointed, could not bear 

Through pride that sight, but thought himself impaired." 

Here Milton represents the anointing of Christ above 
Lucifer, and the jealousy resulting, as the cause of the 
rebellion far back in the ages, when 



124 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

" As yet this world was not, and chaos wild 
Reigned where these heavens now roll, where earth now rests, 
Upon her centre poised." 

The same view is adopted by Dr. Hopkins. " It ap- 
pears," he says, " that man is more an ultimate end than 
angels, that angels were made to answer ends for man, 
.... The angels were made in some way to know that 
God had peculiar and grand designs to answer by man, 
.... that One of that race, .... even a man, should be 
the Head of a most glorious kingdom, and be the Lord 
to whom they must yield obedience." 

" This was, most probably, the occasion of the rebellion 

of those who sinned Lucifer, who was at the head 

of all the angels, the highest and noblest creature that God 

had made, was displeased with such a plan He refused 

to stoop so low as to become a servant, .... and serve one 
in the human family as his Lord and King." 

Dr. Emmons says about the same : " It is likely that the 
holy angels consented to bow to the sceptre of Christ, 
while Satan and his followers disdained such low and ser- 
vile employment." 

My honored father thus expresses the same idea in one 
of his unpublished sermons : " The development of the 
personality of the Divine nature in the Son, and putting 
angels in subjection to him, may have been the temptation 
to pride, to envy, to unbelief, and to doubt in respect to 
his real divinity, and finally to open insurrection against 
him. The supposition gains probability if we consider that 
the first work in which angels were called to act as minis- 
tering spirits was the creation of a new world and race of 
beiugs but a little below them, one of whom, in alliance 
with the Divine nature, was destined to sit upon the throne, 
principalities and powers being subject to him. There 
was a time when the Son was proclaimed in heaven the 
Supreme Regent, and all the angels were required to wor- 



THE FIEST-BOSN. 125 

ship him. And if the annunciation of the exaltation of 
our inferior nature to supreme dominion in the person of 
the Son preceded the revolt, it may have been the occa- 
sion of it." 

The extracts given are claimed to represent the com- 
mon, if not the catholic opinion. The only error in the 
theory is in regarding the annunciation of man's exaltation 
as the occasion of Lucifer's revolt, instead of regarding his 
revolt as the occasion of that annunciation. 

It will be noticed with what caution the theory speaks : 
"if the annunciation preceded the revolt." It is not 
proved to have preceded. It is purely conjectural ; it is 
in the highest degree improbable. It is improbable that 
the creature head of the mighty universe would be re- 
moved from office without fault. It is unlikely that a 
change of dynasty in a vast empire would be resolved on 
unnecessarily, while the first incumbents were discharging 
their functions acceptably. It is improbable God would 
give Lucifer so plausible an excuse for revolt, an excuse 
which explains the entrance of sin too well. It assigns an 
occasion for it too nearly approaching to the definition of a 
temptation. If " it was calculated to try the allegiance of 
all the heavenly host, and would afford more occasion for 
jealousy, envy, and unbelief than anything that could hap- 
pen in the direct, undivided government of God," then 
surely it was a temptation of tremendous power. But 
God tempteth no man. God never gave Lucifer reason 
to say, " I was dethroned for nothing ; I was removed for 
no fault." 

This is precisely the version of the matter the Deceiver 
would be likely to give. It is a mistake, small in appear- 
ance, which he would be ingenious enough to slip in un- 
perceived. But it colors and changes the system through- 
out. Correct this mistake, and the theory is perfected; 
the Scriptural evidence in its favor cumulative and abun- 



126 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

dant ; the objections against it susceptible of easy an- 
swer. 

We will only add, that this view possesses a peculiar in- 
terest to believers. It is the doctrine of their own as well 
as their Redeemer's birthright. Our adoption is our par- 
ticipation with him in the primogeniture. As he is heir, 
we are joint heirs. As he is heir by appointment, so are 
we joint heirs by appointment. He was anointed by sub- 
stitution to the headship, and carries us with him. His 
adoption, in its humiliation and in its exaltation, is ours. 
If we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him. We 
are all of one. We are his predestined counterparts, that 
he may be 7rp&>TOTO/co<? irpcoTOTOtccov, " First-born of many 
first-born." 

Only the spirit of God can initiate us into these exalted 
mysteries. Only the spirit of adoption can reveal to us 
what eye hath not seen, ear heard, nor carnal heart con- 
ceived, of our adoptive rank and its far more exceeding 
and eternal weight of glory. But God hath revealed it 
unto us by his spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, 
even the deep things of God. 



CHAPTER XII. 



DETHRONEMENT OF LUCIFER. 



" We aveestle against spiritual wickedness in Heaven." — 

Epb. vi. 12. 

THAT Lucifer was once in heaven, sinned there, drew 
away many angels into rebellion, and was at some 
time cast down, is the almost universal conception of 
Christendom. 

The question we raise is simply as to the elate of his 
expulsion. The general impression has been, that he was 
expelled immediately after his fall. Milton, indeed, allows 
him time enough to organize an army, invent gunpow- 
der, establish founcleries, cast heavy artillery, and hold his 
ground against all created power, yielding at last only to 
Almighty thunderbolts. 

The popular conception, however, is, that as soon as 
Lucifer rebelled God cast him down to hell, and this, it 
is commonly supposed, was before the creation of man. 

This idea has arisen from a careless interpretation of 
Jude 6, and 2 Peter ii. 4, which speak of the angels that 
left their principality, being cast down to Tartarus. But it 
is denied that these passages refer to the original revolt of 
Lucifer, for the following reasons : — 

1. The fault described is desertion of one's official rank 
and station for a lower one, whereas Lucifer clung to his 
Station and aimed to increase and fortify his power. 

2. The punishment inflicted is expressly described to 
be close confinement. The parties of whom Jude speaks 
" He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness." 



128 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Peter says, " He delivered them into chains of darkness, 
to be reserved unto judgment." If the Holy Spirit does 
not mean to indicate close imprisonment until the judg- 
ment-day in these words, we see not by what words he 
could express it. 

But is Satan thus confined? By no means, for this 
same apostle says, 1 Peter v. 8 : " Your adversary, the 
Devil, as a roaring lion walketh about seeking whom he 
may devour." Peter, then, certainly did not include him 
among those he describes as chained in Tartarus. "It is 
certain," says Albert Barnes, " that Satan and his angels 
were not chained down in hell in our Saviour's time." 
(Notes, Eph. ii. 2.) It is equally certain, we add, that 
they are not the parties mentioned by Peter and Jude who 
were so chained. 

3. There is reason to think that Jude and Peter both 
refer to Gen. vi. 2 : " The sons of God saw the daughters 
of men that they were fair ; and they took them wives 
of all which they chose." 

Peter is illustrating the truth that " the Lord knoweth 
how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve 
the unjust to the day of judgment to be punished." Now 
if Gen. vi. 2 is referred to, it is a case in point ; since it 
was the Titanic offspring of those marriages that were 
swept off by the deluge, while Noah was delivered. But 
if he refers to the original fall of Lucifer, how is it in 
point ? By what principle of association can its introduc- 
tion be accounted for ? On the other hand, it would be 
natural for him to refer to Gen. vi. 2, for both he and all 
whom he addressed were educated in the belief that the 
giants were the offspring of angelic marriages, and were 
thus confined in Tartarus. The allusion is in perfect keep- 
ing with the whole scope of ancient belief on the subject, 
just such an allusion as would be readily made, and readily 
understood. 



DETHEONEMENT OF LUC1FEE. 129 

In Ju.de this is still more evident ; for, having spoken of 
the angels, he passes to the case of Sodom, and their going 
after strange flesh as top ofxobov tovtol? rpoirov in like 
manner to these, namely, the angels above mentioned ; on 
which Alford remarks, " The manner was similar, because 
the angels committed fornication with another race than 
themselves."' 

In his prolegomena to this epistle Alford refers to a 
tract on this subject by Dr. Kurtz of Germany, in which 
" he has gone far to decide against any reference of Gen. 
vi. 2 to the Sethites, or of Jude 6, 7 to the fall of the 
Devil and his angels. The exegesis of Hengstenberg, and 
those who think with him, depends on the spiritual accep- 
tation in this case of the word €K7ropvevaaaai,, 'giving 
themselves over to fornication,' which Kurtz completely 
disproves. The facts of the history of the catastrophe of 
the cities of the plain render it quite out of the question." 

Here again, as in Peter, all is in perfect keeping with 
the universal ancient belief. It is just such an allusion to 
Gen. vi. 2 as would be naturally made and understood, 
while a reference to an event before the creation of man 
is foreign to the Apostle's purpose, and extremely forced 
and unnatural. 

The belief that Peter and Jude refer to Gen. vi. 2 is 
not, however, confined to those who suppose that " the 
sons of God " there mentioned were angels. Faber con- 
siders them to have been Sethites, and yet argues, as Dr. 
Bushnell affirms conclusively, that Peter and Jude had 
them in mind. 

Thus, on critical grounds alone, we dispose of a theory 
which compels us to conceive of the government of the 
universe as carrying on war with its own state-prison for 
ages, and making an infinite sacrifice to destroy an incar- 
cerated felon, thunder-scarred, and chained in everlasting 
fires. Thus we open the way to a true interpretation of 



130 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Eph. vi. 12, by setting it in the focus of all Scripture rays 
concerning the dethronement of Lucifer. 

Let us, then, glance once more at the germ of all proph- 
ecy, that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's 
head. Of course his head was not already bruised ; it was 
the retaliatory stroke of the wounded heel which must ac- 
complish the prediction. 

Next we turn our attention to the Book of Job, prob- 
ably the oldest in the Bible. Now this book opens with 
a scene in heaven, where Satan presents himself with 
other angels before the Lord, with no sign of being a 
state prisoner escaped from his chains, but every sign of 
being of prominent rank and station. 

" There was a day when the sons of God came to pre- 
sent themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also 
among them " ; or in the second chapter, " And Satan 
came also among them to present himself before the 
Lord," — the customary phrase denoting homage. 

Now it is the universal etiquette of courts, that the 
notice of the throne is not wont to be first extended to 
officers in disgrace, or to those who are for any reason for- 
bidden the royal presence. Yet here the Lord addresses 
Satan first, and him only. " The inquiry addressed to 
him," says Mr. Barnes, " does not appear to have been 
made as if it were improper that Satan should have ap- 
peared there, for no blame seems to have attached to him 
for this." 

But suppose an escaped state prisoner should come 
before Queen Victoria, would no blame attach to him? 
Suppose Mr. Mason should contrive to appear at a Cabinet 
meeting in Washington, would President Lincoln ask his 
opinion on the loyalty of Charles Sumner or of Secretary 
Seward, without the least intimation that he was out of 
place ? Would he give him full liberty to confiscate the 
goods and afflict the persons of those highest in loyalty ? 



DETHRONEMENT OF LUCIFER. 131 

Manifestly, then, at that date when Moses put this book in 
the canon Satan was not a state prisoner, but a high officer 
of the government, not yet displaced. 

So viewed, Satan's assault upon Job and its result, fore- 
shadowing as they do his attack upon Christ and its issue, 
are most instructive and appropriate. And the book itself 
is seen to contain a Divine disclosure of the principles at 
issue in the grand drama of redemption. 

Another case in point is found in 1 Kings xxii. 9, where 
Ahab inquires of the prophet Micaiah whether he shall go 
up to Ramoth Gilcad and fight, as all his prophets urged 
him to do. Micaiah, the prophet of the Lord, answers : 
*' I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of 
heaven standing by him, on his right hand and on his left. 
And the Lord said, ' Who shall persuade Ahab that he may 
go up and fall at Ramoth Gilead?' and one said on this 
manner, and another on that manner. And there came 
forth a spirit and stood before the Lord and said, ' I will 
persuade him.' And the Lord said, ' Wherewith ?' and 
he said, ' I will go forth and be a lying spirit in the mouth 
of all his prophets.' And He said, ' Thou shalt per- 
suade him and prevail."' Accordingly Micaiah tells Ahab 
that the Lord hath put an evil spirit in the mouth of his 
prophets. 

Now this certainly represents the heavenly hosts as not 
yet in Ahab's time purged of the presence of deceitful 
spirits. On the contrary, heaven is seen to contain a 
mixed population, some good and some evil, and the dis- 
crimination is yet future. 

Another striking instance is presented in Zach. hi. 1, 2, 
compared with Jude ix. : — 

" And he showed me Joshua the high-priest standing 
before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his 
right hand to resist him. And Jehovah said unto Satan : 
* The Lord rebuke thee, Satan, even the Lord that hath 



132 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee ; is not this a brand plucked 
from the fire ? ' ' The passage in Jude is, " Yet Michael 
the archangel, when contending with the Devil he disputed 
about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a 
railing accusation (literally, sentence of blasphemy), but 
said, the Lord rebuke thee." 

The dispute which Jude mentions is the same that 
Zachariah actually sees in vision. The angel of the Lord 
of the one is Michael, the archangel of the other. The 
reply in both cases is the same : " The Lord rebuke thee, 
Satan." It is a dispute where Satan accuses, and God jus- 
tifies Israel, or that body of which Moses was head, and 
Satan's accusation is denoted by the filthy rags of the high- 
priest, and God's justification by the change of raiment. 

Here, as in Job, Satan appears in heaven before the 
Lord ; and Jude employs this remarkable statement, that 
Michael the archangel durst not bring against him a sen- 
tence of blasphemy. And the meaning is, as Alford re- 
marks, blasphemy against the adversary. 

Now blasphemy always implies some disrespect to God. 
But how could disrespect to Satan imply disrespect to 
God, unless Satan still stood in that primacy of office 
which God had established ? If that were the case, then, 
however unworthy the incumbent might be, still, in virtue 
of his office, a blasphemy of him might savor of blasphemy 
against God who anointed him. 

Thus, in this remarkable passage, the Holy Spirit sup- 
plies evidence, none the less pointed for being incidental 
and indirect, that Satan in Zechariah's time still stood 
among the " glories " of heaven, even Michael the arch- 
angel fearing to speak a word of disrespect. 

The next passage of evidence is found in the time of 
Christ, and is composed of the testimony of the party 
in question himself, and the admission of Christ. In 
the temptation, Luke iv. 6, Satan said to Jesus : " All 



DETHRONEMENT OF LUCIFER. 133 

this power will I give thee, and the glory of them ; for 
that is delivered unto me, and to whomsoever I will I 
give it." 

Now unless this were true, unless Jesus believed it to 
be true, how would it be a temptation ? There is no 
temptation in a large reward which is known not to be 
in the power of him that offers it. Therefore, although 
Satan's testimony would not be valid when it was for 
his interest to lie, yet when it was for his interest not 
to lie, as here, his testimony might be entertained. 

Now that Jesus really believed that Satan possessed 
such delegated power appears from the fact that in three 
places he calls him " the prince of this world," and each 
time in such a way as to imply the reality of that office. 

John xii. 31 : " Now is the judgment of this world ; now 
shall the prince of this world be cast out," — now that is 
about to take place which will lead to his expulsion. Cer- 
tainly, therefore, he was not cast out till then. John xiv. 
30 : " The prince of this world cometh and hath nothing 
in me." That is, he seeks to tempt me, but finds nothing 
in me to answer to his solicitations. John xvi. 11 : " The 
Holy Spirit shall convince the world of judgment, because 
the prince of this world is judged." That is to say, the 
office of the Holy Spirit is to bring on the judgment-day, 
in which the world will be judged because its prince is 
judged. 

Now t Satan, in the temptation, claims no more for him- 
self as to rank and office than Jesus here fully concedes. 
There is nothing said about usurpation. On the contrary, 
the language is just such as it would be if Satan was still 
in possession of his original office, which was about to be 
taken away from him. And this renders the fact of the 
temptation of Christ intelligible. But if Satan was already 
deprived, and a state prisoner, such a transaction becomes 
incomprehensible. 



134 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

We come, then, to the Epistle to the Ephesians. In the 
second chapter, Paul speaks of the course of this world as 
" according to the prince of the power of the air," or as 
Conybeare and Howson render it, " ruler of the powers 
of the air." 

On this Albert Barnes says, speaking of the fallen an- 
gels : " They must have some locality, some part of the 
universe where they dwell ; that they were not confined 
down to hell in the time of the Redeemer is clear from the 

New Testament Why is there any improbability in 

the belief that their residence should have been in the 
air?" 

Olshausen says, " We are fully justified in considering 
the ah' not to mean the atmosphere, but the higher regions 
generally, which we are wont to call heaven." Ellicott 
remarks, " There is no reason for limiting the term to the 
physical atmosphere." Bloomfield says the word power 
denotes all the celestial forces arranged in troops, and 
under regular subordination. Alford says, " The word 
power is used here to represent the aggregate of those in 
power, as we say the government." 

This would be completely unintelligible if Satan had 
been once condemned and chained in hell, but if it is only 
his original office not yet wrested from his grasp, but about 
to be, all is plain. 

We come then to Eph. vi. 12: "For we wrestle not 
against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against 
powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, 
against spiritual wickedness in high places." 

The expression "in high places" is literally "in heav- 
en"; thus Conybeare and Howson render it, "the com- 
pany of the evil spirits in the heavens." Albert Barnes 
renders it " in celestial or heavenly places," and says it is 
the same in the original rendered, Phil. ii. 10, things in 
heaven, " That at the name of Jesus every knee should 



DETHRONEMENT OF LUCIFER. 135 

"bow, of tilings in heaven," &c. Also in our Lord's pray- 
er, " Our Father which art in heaven." He also remarks, 
" It is probable that the allusion here is to the ranks and 
orders sustained before their fall, something like which 
they may still retain." 

Bengel says, "In supra coelestibus," "In the highest 
heavens"; and then adds, "Etium hostes seel captivi," 
"Enemies indeed, but captives." But Paul was not 
thinking of fighting with captives already led in chains. 
There would be no bravery in that. 

Alford says, " That residence of evil spirits which in 
Eph. ii. 2 was said to be in the air, is now said to be in 
the heavens above us." Ellicott translates it, " In the 
supernal regions." Olshausen says, " It can only denote 
the place of residence of the principalities and powers re- 
ferred to. The conflict with flesh and blood on earth is 
contrasted with the conflict with spirits in heaven." 

" This view," says Professor Eadie, " is maintained by 
no less names than Jerome, who adds, ' Hsec autem om- 
nium doctorum opinio est ' ; by Ambrosiaster, Luther, 
Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, Bucer, Estius, Grotius, Bengel, 
Hyperius, Koppe, Hammond, Meier, Holshausen, Mey- 
er, Olshausen, Harless, Von Gerlach, DeWette, Whitby, 
Barnes, Bloomfield, and MacKnight." 

Professor Eadie himself, however, is of opinion that 
the Apostle means " the celestial spots occupied by the 
Church," which he thinks " those evil spirits have invaded." 

Let us pass on then to Rev. xii., where we see that 
conflict -brought to its climax : — 

" And there was war in heaven. Michael and his an- 
gels fought against the Dragon, and the Dragon fought 
and his angels, and prevailed not ; neither was there place 
found any more in heaven. And the great Dragon was 
cast out, that old serpent called the Devil, and Satan ; he 
was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out 



136 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

with him." " And I heard a voice saying, in heaven, Now 
is come salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our 
God, and the power of his Christ ; for the accuser of our 
brethren is cast down, which accused them before God 
night and day." 

Now that this represents something subsequent to the 
crucifixion commentators generally admit. That it repre- 
sents some great result of the ascension of Christ some 
interpreters have clearly seen. Thus Alford says : " The 
man-child is the Lord Jesus Christ and none other, and 
this result forms one of those landmarks by which the 
legitimacy of various interpretations may be tested, and 
of which we may say that every interpretation which over- 
steps this measure is thereby convicted of error After 

a conflict with the prince of this world, the Son of the 
woman was taken up to heaven, and sat on the right hand 
of God ; words can hardly be plainer than these. The 
casting down of Satan from the office of accuser of the 
brethren in heaven was evidently connected with the 
great justifying work of redemption. His voice is heard 
before God no more, and his angels are cast down with 
him into the earth, where now the conflict is waging 
during the short time which shall elapse between the as- 
cension and the second advent, when he shall be bound." 

The history of Satan outlined in the Scriptures " con- 
sists," says Auberlen, " of an ever deeper downfall, in 
four gradations or periods. The first extends to the first 
coming of Christ. In this period the Devil not only rules 
on earth, but is also still in heaven ; his power is not 
yet broken ; . . . . the second period is from Christ to the 
commencement of the millennium. Satan is cast out of 

heaven to earth, where he exercises yet free power 

The third period embraces the millennium. The enemy is 
bound, and as he was cast out of heaven to earth, so he 
is now cast into the bottomless pit and rendered harmless. 



DETHRONEMENT OF LUCIFER. 137 

After having been let loose awhile, lie is, fourthly, judged, 
and cast forever into the lake of fire. Thus the whole 
history which the Apocalypse gives of Satan is a continued 
succession of his being cast out and hurled down." 

The evidence, then, is abundant that Satan was first 
dethroned by the ascension of Christ, and not before. It 
is revealed in as plain language, and in as many forms, 
with as much repetition as any other doctrine of Scripture. 

What can be plainer than to see Satan actually present- 
ing himself before the Lord in Job and Zechariah ? What 
more explicit than for Paul to say : The real conflict is 
not with flesh and blood but with the company of wicked 
spirits in heaven ? What more convincing than to see the 
Seed of the woman caught up to the Right Hand, a war 
ensue, Satan cast out, and to hear a shout of triumph be- 
cause the accuser is cast down by the blood of the Lamb ? 
Is any doctrine of the Bible sustained by proof more posi- 
tive, evidence more point-blank than this? 

But if this be true, the common view on this subject is 
not only false, but exceedingly pernicious, and calculated 
to darken the whole Bible, and obscure the plan of re- 
demption. According to the prevailing hypothesis, we are 
obliged to conceive of Lucifer's apostasy as sudden and 
total, like an express-train at full speed suddenly reversing 
its direction, whereas all observation, the practice of courts, 
and the philosophy of the mind, confirm the ancient say- 
ings of Juvenal : — 

" Nemo repente fait turpissimus." 

Moreover, this theory represents God as not long-suffer- 
ing in the very place where long-suffering was most appro- 
priate, namely, towards his first-born creatures, who had to 
begin without the advantage of past history and recorded 
experience. Thus it makes God severer even than Sinai, 
where he proclaimed himself, " The Lord, the Lord God, 
merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and of great mercy " ; 



138 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

for it represents him as quick to anger, and of no mercj 
at all to his angelic family. 

Besides this, it represents the original controversy be- 
tween God and Satan as settled by force, not by truth. 
"We wonder Milton did not blush to give his Satan so 
plausible a right to say : — 

" Farthest from Him is best, 
Whom reason hath equalled, force hath made supreme. 

What matter where, if I be still the same, 
And what I should be, all but less than Ho 
Whom thunder hath made greater ? " 

But besides tins, it represents God as carrying on a war 
of ages against a defeated and captive prisoner, loaded with 
chains and hurled into penal fire. To destroy a being 
already destroyed, the Son of God must die. The universe 
must be convulsed for ages with a conflict between the 
Divine government and its state prisoners. 

Thus this conception entirely misrepresents the charac- 
ter of God, the nature of sin, and the real issues at stake 
in the controversy. It renders it impossible to have any 
sensible ideas of the controversy. It involves the whole 
subject in unspeakable absurdity. 

The view which we defend, while fully and pointedly 
revealed in the Bible, is in perfect accordance with the 
principles of mental philosophy and of moral government, 
as we proceed to evince in another chapter. 



CHAPTER XIII. 



PURIFICATION OF HEAVEN. 



" It was necessary that .... THE heavenly things themselves 

should be pueified." — Heb. ix. 23. 

TO purify is to remove impurity of some kind, physical 
or moral. The impurity contemplated in the Leviti- 
cal sacrifices was ceremonial and typical. That of which 
it was the shadow was real and moral. 

The impurity of the earthly holy of holies could be 
purged away by the blood of beasts ; but that of heaven 
itself, only by the blood of Christ. That impurity consisted 
in the presence and power of Lucifer, and of his principles. 

Our text, therefore, is parallel in meaning with Heb. 
ii. 14 : " Through death to destroy him that had the power 
of death." Destroying him was purging heaven. It is 
parallel also with Romans hi. 25, " To declare God's 
righteousness, that God might be just." God's being just 
was, in part, his destroying Satan, or purging heaven. 

Lucifer still retained his original official position, though 
unworthy ; nor was it possible for God, consistently with 
the best interests of the universe, to execute destroying 
justice and purge heaven, except by the blood of Christ. 

It was impossible, first, on account of the infinite love of 
God to his first-born, and his infinite long-suffering, which 
must be completely exhausted and all ties sundered, before 
the Father could execute his strange work of judgment 
without remedy. 

It was impossible the Father should give him up with- 
out exhausting all possible means to avert his fate, and 



140 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

those who assert so boldly that for the least deviation from 
perfect rectitude God cast him down to hell, say what God 
has never told them, and what is in the highest degree 
contrary to every lineament of his revealed character. 

It was impossible, also, from the love of the universe to 
him. This was his birthright. Love to the head was the 
organic bond of strength to the empire. In the love of 
this nation for Washington, of France for Napoleon, of 
Israel for David, we have a faint illustration of the prin- 
ciple. Now that love could not be rudely bereaved. God 
had caused him, like a cedar in Lebanon, to strike his roots 
deep and wide in the soil of affection. He could not tear 
him up, and lacerate the bleeding heart of myriads. 

But it was impossible, also, on account of the nature of 
the controversy. The principles and arguments of the 
rebellion were subtle, specious, and difficult to refute. In 
refusing to deny himself for the good of others Lucifer 
affirmed that he was imitating God. The Holy Spirit 
represents him as saying, " I will ascend, I will be as 
God." God is almighty, he reasoned, and nothing can 
happen but by his permission, and therefore self-denial is 
with him impossible. There is no self-denial in having 
one's own will and way perfectly and forever. 

But if God is incapable of self-denial, why should it be 
required of his first-born, his image ? If self-denial would 
be an imperfection in the Deity, it would be an imperfec- 
tion in the representative of Deity. The representative 
would not correspond to the Deity, but be opposite to him 
and contrary. 

To this reasoning it was not enough to oppose a simple 
assertion on the part of God that he was infinitely self- 
denying. It would have sufficed for faith, but not for 
unbelief. 

And if from assertion God proceeded to argument ; if he 
reasoned that the very act of creation must involve self- 



PUKIFICATION OF HEAVEN. 141 

limitation, since it draws a line between the Divine me 
and the not me, and since the Creator binds himself to 
observe the laws of created mind, it would be easy for 
unbelief to evade and parry conviction, and recur afresh 
to the Divine power to prevent evil or unpleasant events. 

It was easy to say, the idea of self-denial in always hav- 
ing one's own way is absurd. In declining self-denial I 
am only like God. It is not undutiful in me, but the 
closest copying after infinite perfection. By this Lucifer 
could deceive not only his own sympathizers, but also the 
loyal portion of heaven. 

It was as easy for him to deceive holy angels in this 
way before the cross, as to deceive the very elect in this 
way after the cross. And yet it has been almost univer- 
sally believed by good men that self-sacrifice is impossible 
to God, and it has been recently asserted that it is no part 
of the doctrine of the atonement that the Divine nature 
participated in the humiliation of Christ, and that if the 
Bible asserted such a thing it could not be believed. 1 

Now it must be conceded a higher exhibition of Luci- 
fer's guile thus to deceive the very elect, in full view of 
the infinite ransom, than to deceive angels, who had never 
seen as yet that amazing tragedy. 

And on the same principle that it would be impossible 
for God adequately to manifest his abhorrence for such a 
sentiment now, while held by his own Church, it was im- 
possible to manifest it on high, when that opinion was held 
even by the loyal angels. 

God saw that the loyal public sentiment of the empire 
was so far affected by this philosophy, which seemed ex- 
ceeding plausible, that without correcting it he could not 
safely be just in destroying Satan. The public sentiment 
would not sustain him. His loyal subjects would be alien- 
ated and thrown into the arms of rebellion. 
1 Barnes on the Atonement. 



142 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

But this impossibility was increased by Satan's power 
of accusation against the government. The defence of 
rebels is the accusation of the government. Lucifer could 
not defend himself without accusing God. 

If self-denial was impossible to God, so that without it 
a creature at the head of empire would most perfectly 
resemble him, why demand it? It is unreasonable. It is 
arbitrary. It is derogatory to innocence, and humiliating 
to the feelings. So children always defend their own dis- 
obedience by complaining of their parents' or teacher's 
severity. 

These murmurs and complaints excited sympathy, and 
resulted in a serious alienation of confidence. There was 
no local drawing off. There was that kind of distance, that 
cessation of intercourse and communion, which can take 
place between neighbors and friends and brethren. 

But how break the force of those accusations ? How 
declare his own righteousness ; so as to be just in dealing 
with the rebellion ? Mere words were not enough. With- 
out something more conclusive than words the government 
could not vindicate itself. 

Again, it was impossible to proceed on account of Luci- 
fer's accusing power over the creature. When the evils 
of his administration begun to become apparent Lucifer 
would naturally throw the blame upon the creatures below 
him. This would make him strict, severe, inexorable. 
As chief executive, he would set up a theory of justice 
inconsistent with mercy. 

Forgiveness, he would say, is impossible under law. 
Repentance makes no difference. Penalty never is and 
never can be remitted. In this, too, he claims to be as God. 
This is justice pure and simple, the justice of the immac- 
ulate God. Thus he builds himself up, the self-styled jus- 
tice of the universe. He is immaculate, and his censure 
is infallible ; so he brings the universe under bondage to a 
merciless justice, a counterfeit justice, which God abhors. 



PURIFICATION OF HEAVEN. 143 

But how do creatures know that Lucifer is not really 
just. He seems so. They cannot see all that God sees, 
nor know all that God knows. To punish him suddenly 
would seem like punishing justice. It is necessary first to 
unmask him, and satisfy the public mind of heaven that his 
justice is not real justice, and that he himself is exposed to 
the stroke of God's righteous indignation. Then God can 
be just and carry the moral sense of the loyal universe 
with him. 

Once more, it was not possible to purge him out of 
heaven, on account of his deceiving power. God being 
right and he wrong in the controversy, the point inevitably 
came when Lucifer would be almost convinced. He must 
either yield to or evade God's argument. He came where 
the road forked between submission on the one hand, and 
lying on the other, and he chose the latter, and took refuge 
in fallacy, sophistry, and fraud. 

Now, although this is a fatal policy in the long run, it 
gave him the advantage at first. God was limited to one 
set of weapons, Lucifer could use two. God cannot lie ; 
Lucifer can. God could move in right lines only, Lucifer 
could move in straight or crooked. 

The corrupting and ruinous consequences of lying, at 
that early stage of being, could be known to God only. 
He could warn Lucifer, but unbelief could set aside the 
warning. For the time being Lucifer revelled in a fancied 
superiority. He enveloped his administration in the mazy 
methods of Machiavelian diplomacy and fraud, concealing 
himself from creature detection with impenetrable disguise. 

To tear off that disguise, to let the universe find him 
out, to turn his crooked and tortuous policy inside out, was 
at first impossible. He must be allowed to go on until 
he should cross his own track and convict himself. The 
wicked must be snared in the work of his hands. He must 
fall into the pit himself had digged. He must have time 



144 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

therefore to set his snares and dig his pit, before he could 
himself be snared and fall. 

Thus we see what was the nature of that power of 
death he is spoken of as holding. It was a power of a 
moral nature, resulting from these six impossibilities of his 
overthrow, namely, the infinite affection of God to his 
first-born ; his. deep root in the affection of the universe ; 
the extreme plausibility of his assertion that self-denial was 
impossible to God, and therefore not essential in a crea- 
ture ; his complaints of God ; his accusing power over his 
inferiors ; and his unscrupulous diplomacy. 

These elements of his position were such, that, though 
he was exerting a depraving and corrupting influence of 
immense and increasing force, it was yet impossible to 
remove him. His power was increasingly great and in- 
creasingly deadly; it was a power of death to the universe. 
Of this deadly corrupting power heaven was purged by 
the blood of Christ alone. 

By shedding the blood of Christ Lucifer, in the first 
place, completely uprooted himself from the affections and 
tender mercies of God. 

When, in the person of Christ, the fulness of the God- 
head placed itself bodily in the power of that unfilial hand, 
and received the parricidal blow at which the sun grew 
dark, it sufficed to sever all bonds forever. Then the 
child forever weaned himself from that Father's love, and 
set himself apart to the stroke of unmingled justice. 

By the same act, also, Lucifer uprooted himself from 
the affections of the universe. When the full mystery of 
Christ's person was disclosed on high after his resurrec- 
tion ; when they recognized, not only a creature of celestial 
loveliness, but the Creator revealed in and by that crea- 
ture, their love was augmented infinitely, and their hearts 
weaned from the murderer. 

The sight of such guilt, even on earth, has power to 



PURIFICATION OF HEAVEN. 145 

petrify love and strike affection dead. The blood of an 
innocent creature alone would have had this effect to some 
extent. But only the blood of the Son of God, Divine as 
well as human, could in a moment sever the heart-strings 
of the whole heavenly world from him whose hand had 
shed that blood. 

By shedding the blood of Christ, Lucifer annihilated his 
own argument, that God cannot experience self-denial, and 
ought not to require it of his first-born. 

Christ was God, for this express purpose made flesh, 
and becoming obedient unto death that he might undergo 
an infinite self-sacrifice. Christ was also man, God's first- 
born by adoption, and had voluntarily undergone whatever 
of self-sacrifice was possible to a created being. Thus 
Christ had exhibited a perfect act of self-sacrifice in both 
natures, in spite of Lucifer's utmost attempts to seduce 
or terrify him from it. 

From the desert to the cross temptation beat against 
him like a storm. But the fiercer the temptation the 
more entire his self-sacrifice, and when even Lucifer could 
do nothing more, in the bitterness of death he said, " It is 
finished," and died. And now he rises, he ascends on 
high, he shows his blood, and tells the universe what he 
has borne, and how Lucifer in vain sought to prevent it, 
and the argument of rebellion is answered. 

It had been said that God could not be self-denying ; 
but here is an act of infinite self-sacrifice. It had been 
alleged that any other creature in Lucifer's place would 
do as he had done ; but here is an act of perfect and 
entire creature self-sacrifice. Thus Lucifer was defeated, 
not by 

" Thunder 
Winged with red lightning and impetuous rage," 

but by matter of fact. 

God gave Lucifer entire liberty, unlimited freedom of 



146 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

debate. He was not unwilling to hear and to have heard 
all that Lucifer chose to offer. But what could he say ? 
Could he say that it was only a creature, and not God? 
Or that it was only God, and not a creature ? It was both. 
Christ had not humbled himself by halves. Therefore 
Lucifer was absolutely speechless. Least of all did he 
vaunt himself 

" All but less than He 
Whom thunder hath made greater." 

Instead of this, his mouth was shut, for there was no an- 
swer to be made. He saw it, and all heaven saw it. And 
now the way was open for God with safety to express his 
righteous abhorrence of the principles of the rebellion. 
He could do so, and carry the public sentiment of the loyal 
universe with him. 

By the blood of Christ, moreover, the accusations 
against God Avere answered. As self-denial had been 
tehown to be proper to God, it was plain that it might 
be properly required of the creature, who would thereby 
directly resemble his Maker. Hence, in insisting upon it 
God had been simply benevolent, and not arbitrary nor 
eevere. Therefore, all the murmurs and complaints and 
exaggerated charges of the rebel leaders fell to the ground. 
The Divine administration was vindicated and justified. 
God not only was righteous, but was now declared and 
fceen to be so in the matter in dispute, and thus the loyal 
public sentiment was prepared to sustain the executive in 
dealing with traitors. 

By the blood of Christ once more Lucifer's power as 
accuser of the brethren was broken. That is, the power 
of his idea of justice, and his supposed immaculate embodi- 
ment thereof. He who accused others, and before whom 
all trembled, must of course be spotless himself. 

Now Christ ascended with his blood, and showed that 
he, — so strict, so severe, whose great doctrine was, that 



PURIFICATION OF HEAVEN. 147 

penalty cannot be remitted, — that lie himself had perpe- 
trated the most unjust deed that could be conceived. It 
was the cruel murder, not only of an innocent man, but 
of an incarnate God. It was a murder effected by means 
of a sham trial, on a false accusation, after a life of radiant 
excellence. It was a murder contrived, threatened, and 
perpetrated at last, for no other reason than to drive 
Christ from self-denial and satiate a deadly revenge. 

This disclosure was like a flash of lightning. Lucifer 
fell at once and forever from his ascendency over the 
conscience of the universe, and the heavenly world was 
purged. 

Finally, the blood of Christ destroyed Lucifer's power 
as a deceiver. Christ had spoken truth, and done right, 
and moved in straight lines. In his mouth there was no 
guile. If Lucifer was deceived, it was only as vice is 
ever deceived by virtue. Lucifer deceived himself by 
disbelieving in Christ's truth and disinterestedness and 
fortitude. 

At the same time, to meet all Lucifer's methods of 
guile and resist them was no easy task. It demanded 
the highest intellectual qualities, of depth and velocity 
and subtlety. As Jesus himself said to his disciples, " Be 
ye wise as serpents and harmless as doves." 

Now when it was made apparent that pure truth was 
a match for falsehood, and honest dealing for intrigue, in 
any one who was willing to sacrifice all, even life itself, 
for truth's sake, then the moral tone of the universe rose ; 
the prestige of diplomacy was turned to disgrace, its tem- 
porary advantage to disastrous defeat, and the hold o£ 
that lying tongue on the confidence of heaven was broken- 
forever. 

Thus the blood of Christ sufficed to purge heaven. It 
severed the last tie between Lucifer and a Father's love, 
uprooted him from the affections of the universe, refuted 



148 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the fundamental principles of rebellion, broke the power 
of his accusations against God, and against creatures infe- 
rior to him, and thoroughly unmasked and convicted him. 

Therefore, when the holy indignation of God expressed 
itself, the holy public sentiment of heaven responded to it. 
When God went forth in judicial sentence, all heaven re- 
joiced, and rang with hallelujahs. Heaven was purged. 
And into that holy place never more to all eternity should 
enter anything that defileth, neither whatsoever loveth or 
maketh a lie. 

In this result we are enabled to unite the main ele- 
ments of truth in the ancient and modern theories of 
atonement. 

From the ancient theory of a thousand years we accept 
the idea that the prominent object was to destroy Satan ; 
rejecting, at the same time, all ideas of fraud or force or 
magic in the transaction. 

From the modern old-school theory we accept the idea 
that the atonement involved a full execution of justice. 
We simply change the object of that justice, and instead 
of Christ, who did not deserve it, substitute Satan, who did. 

From the modern new-school theory we accept the sub- 
lime and most important idea, that the atonement was of 
the nature of an argument addressed to the reason of the 
intelligent universe. As to the precise nature of that 
argument, we differ from the theory in question. We do 
not believe that God undertook to prove that he Avould 
punish the guilty by undeserved suffering inflicted on the 
innocent. 

The point God undertook to prove was, that Lucifer 
merited impeachment and removal, and how that point 
was proved we have now seen. Therefore this result em- 
bodies the important and valuable elements of all past 
theories. 

Of course the discussion is not yet complete. We have 



PURIFICATION OF HEAVEN. 149 

considered one side only of the mighty problem. We 
have considered what was first in order, the indispensable 
condition of everything else, namely, the just removal of 
Satan and the purification of the heavenly place. The 
other side, the redeeming aspect of the glorious theme, 
remains. 

Thus far all is clear. It is easy to see a wide landscape, 
if the eye is only high enough and there is plenty of light. 
A child can see great cities and empires. But we sit with 
Christ in heavenly places. The light in which we see the 
wide panorama is the light of God ; and though the theme 
be wide and the subjects great, the simplest eye can see 
them, because the point of observation is sublime and the 
light intense. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 

"Neither by ttte blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood; 
he entered in once into the holy black, having obtained eter- 
NAL REDEMPTION FOR US." — Heb. IX. 12. 

IN this passage we have the fact of eternal redemption 
having been obtained for us, and the means by which 
it was procured, — the blood of Christ. 

We may consider either of these separately, or both to- 
gether. At present our attention will be confined to the 
first, — What is eternal redemption ? 

It is generally conceded that redemption includes par- 
don of sin and admission to heaven hereafter. Eph. i. 7 : 
" Redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins." 
Rom. viii. 23: "Waiting for the adoption, to wit, the re- 
demption of the body." 

All admit that whatever relates to the perfection of the 
character and consummation of happiness in heaven is 
included under the term redemption. 

But it is apprehended that, to make the definition com- 
plete, an important element is yet to be added, namely, 
that of a restoration to a lost holiness, and a return to an 
interrupted bliss. Without this element we may have 
growth, progress, development, but not redemption. Hence 
it will be our object to show that redemption includes, in 
its very nature, a return to holiness and heaven, and that 
heaven, in the truest and most proper sense, is our native 
land. 

We refer, in the first place, to the definition of the word. 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 151 

The term used in the original is Xurpcocriv, from \vrpoco t 
which corresponds so entirely in sense with our English 
word redeem, that we insert below the definition of the, 
latter given by Webster in full. 1 

It will be noticed that the primary and most of the sec- 
ondary definitions give prominence to the idea of some 
kind of return, or restoration. Even the theological im- 
plies an original liberty before the bondage to sin. But 
the most important point is the legal sense, where the right 
of re-entry is made conspicuous. 

In fact, properly speaking, the word redeem is a law- 
term, first found in the Mosaic legislation. It is proper to 
say that in the Bible it is not so much a theological as a 
legal term, and is to be interpreted accordingly. 

In the law of Moses a regular system of redemption was 
instituted. Neither real estate nor personal service could 
be sold for a longer term than the remainder of forty-nine, 
years from a given date. The fiftieth was a jubilee, or 
year of general redemption. Conditional redemption wag 
allowed before the jubilee, but in the jubilee itself redemp- 
tion was unconditional. When the trumpet of jubilee 

1 " Rf.dekm, 1. To purchase back ; to ransom; to liberate or rescue 
from captivity or bondage, or from any liability to suffer or to be for- 
feited, by paying an equivalent ; as, to redeem prisoners or captured 
goods, to redeem a pledge. 2. To repurchase what has been sold ; to re- 
gain possession of a thing alienated, by repaying the value of it to the 
possessor. 3. To rescue ; to recover ; to deliver from. 4. To compensate ; 
to make amends. 5. To free by making atonement. G. To pay the pen- 
alty of. 7. To save. 8. To perform what has been promised ; to make 
good by performance. 9. In law, to recall an estate, or to obtain the 
right to re-enter upon a mortgaged estate, by paying to the mortgagee 
his principal, interest, and expenses or costs. 10. In theology, to rescue, 
and deliver from the bondage of sin and the penalties of God's violated 
law, by obedience and suffering in the place of the sinner, or by doing 
and suffering that which is accepted in lieu of the sinner's obedience. 
1 1. In commerce, to purchase or pay the value of any promissory note, 
bill, or other evidence of debt," &c. 



152 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

sounded, the statute said, " Proclaim liberty throughout all 
the land unto all the inhabitants thereof; and ye shall 
return every man unto his possession, and every man 
unto his family." 

The law further directed that this jubilee-trumpet should 
sound on the great day of atonement, on which the central 
sacrifice of the system was offered. Thus, by law, the 
idea of return to family and possession was associated 
with the sprinkling of the blood of atonement. 

So great a revolution as this return of property and per- 
sons in a whole nation, after the silent changes of half a 
century, could not fail to stamp ineffaceable associations on 
the words redeem, redeemer, and redemption. It is manifest 
that it was intended it should. The marks of design arei 
nowhere more conspicuous. 

The practice of redemption was nationalized by statute 
for fifteen centuries, and all that time the law was a school- 
master to bring them to Christ. The law taught them to 
associate the idea of a return of persons and property with 
the words redeem, redeemer, redemption, and so prepare, 
the words for application to Christ. In the mint of the 
law those words were coined and struck which should be 
and are current under the Gospel. 

And if the coins have become worn through use, and. 
the inscriptions faint, it is for us to stamp' them anew in. 
the same mint of the law from which they were first 
issued. When the trumpet of the final jubilee is sounded, 
and Christ's atoning blood has achieved its complete effect, 
then the true Israel of God will return every man unto. 
his family and his possession, not in the temporal Canaan, 
but in heaven, the true Canaan of rest. Hence we sing, 

" Ye who have sold for naught 
The heritage above, 
Come, take it back unbought, 
The gift of Jesus' love. 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 153 

The year of jubilee is come, 
Return ye ransomed sinners home." 

The same idea was enstamped on the word by a cove- 
nant, made before the law, but fulfilled at the exodus. To 
Abraham, God says (Gen. xv. 13) : " Thy seed shall be a 
stranger in a land that is not theirs ; . . . . but in the fourth 
generation they shall come hither again." That is, vir- 
tually, Thy seed shall go from Canaan to Egypt, and return 
from Egypt to Canaan. This was the substance of that 
covenant. Accordingly, we see Israel go down into Egypt, 
and at the exodus we see them return to Canaan. And God 
calls this redeeming them. "I have established my cove- 
nant to give you the land of Canaan, .... and I will redeem 
you with an outstretched arm." And this redemption, too, 
;was preceded by the sprinkling of blood on the door-post. 

The design here is as apparent as in the previous case. 
The nation was in a foreign land, in hard bondage ; there 
was an ancient covenant to carry them back to Canaan, 
and, in executing that covenant, God said, I redeem you. 
Hence, on the shore of the Red Sea, Moses sang, "Thou, 
in thy mercy, hast led forth the people which thou hast 
redeemed." 

Thus the word redemption was designedly imbued with 
associations of deliverance by blood from foreign bondage, 
and restoration to Canaan. Hence, when the redeemed on 
the sea of glass mingled with fire are represented singing 
the song of Moses and the Lamb, it implies that they also 
have been rescued from a foreign thraldom, and restored 
to heaven, their native clime. That there was a typical 
meaning in the whole transaction seems distinctly assert- 
ed, 1 Cor. x. 11: "All these things happened unto them 
for types, and are written for our instruction." Paul had 
been speaking of the exodus and march to Canaan. In- 
deed, the language of religious experience the world over 
has been built on this analogy. Man's natural state of 



154 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

bondage to sin is Egypt ; the Lord's Supper takes the place 
of the Passover ; the Christian life is called a journey- 
through the wilderness ; death is passing over Jordan ; 
and heaven is Canaan. 

The language formed in this way has become a universal 
language, and Christians the world over sing, 

" Sweet fields, beyond the swelling flood, 
Stand dressed in living green, 
So to the Jews old Canaan stood, 
While Jordan rolled between." 

The import of the word redeem received new vividness 
at the return from Babylon. It is in prophesying this 
return that the Lord calls himself Israel's Redeemer in 
the most impressive manner. Probably nowhere else 
in the Bible are the words redeemer and redeem so beau- 
tifully, so sublimely used as in reference to this event. 
The history of the transaction, too, is managed in such a 
manner as to create vivid impressions. We see the de- 
struction of Jerusalem, and the carrying away Israel 
captive to a city whose brazen gates and Cyclopean walls 
were the wonder of the world. We see the exiles hang 
their harps on the willows and weep, as they remember 
Zion. We see Cyrus raised up, Babylon taken, Israel 
sent back, Jerusalem rebuilt, the Temple dedicated with 
mingled weeping and shouting. 

Why is the noise of rejoicing mingled with that of 
weeping? What gives edge to the emotion of the hour, 
whether of pain or of joy ? Is it not the peculiar and 
exquisite sensation of a recovered home and country, 
and national existence, blent with contrasted memories 
of former splendor? It was the old men who remem- 
bered the glories of the former Temple, who wept. Now 
it is remarkable that, in prophesying this, the Spirit con- 
tinually blends it with a higher, a still future deliverance. 
The restoration of the natural Israel, and the final deliver- 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 155 

ance of the spiritual Israel, are so blended and interlaced 
together that it is almost impossible to extricate them. 

"Fear not, thou worm Jacob," cried Isaiah; " I will 
help thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer, the Holy One 
of Israel." " Thus saith the Lord, .... I have blotted 
out as a thick cloud thy transgressions ; . . . . return unto 
me, for I have redeemed thee. Sing, O ye heavens, for 
the Lord hath done it ! ' 

" The Lord will comfort Zion, he will comfort her waste 
places, he will make her wilderness like Eden, like the 
garden of the Lord." 

" Behold I create new heavens and a new earth, and 
the former shall pass away, and no more be called to 
mind ; behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her 
people a joy." 

The later prophecies of Isaiah are full of utterances too 
high for any mere temporal deliverance, and yet they em- 
phatically mention a return. Thus, " The redeemed of 
the Lord shall return, and come with singing unto Zion ; 
everlasting joy shall be upon their heads, they shall ob- 
tain joy and gladness, and sorrow and mourning shall flee 
away." 

The natural Israel realized but a short-lived, imperfect 
joy, and were afterwards dashed in pieces, and scattered 
as we now behold them. 

It is the spiritual Israel the prophetic eye here sees, 
returning out of the Babylon of life into the heavenly 
Jerusalem, which, because it is restored to primitive splen- 
dor, is called the New Jerusalem. 

Instinctively the Church feels this in moments of devout 
inspiration, and sings, 

" Thus, though the universe shall burn, 
And God his works destroy, 
With songs thy ransom shall return, 
And everlasting joy." 



156 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

This, furthermore, was the confession of faith of the 
Church of God from Abraham, to Christ. 

In Heb. xi. 9 - 15, the Apostle states that Abraham 
sojourned in the land of promise as in a strange, that is, 
foreign country,, because he looked for a city already 
founded, whose builder and maker is God. He knew that 
Canaan below, in which Jerusalem was not yet founded, 
was nothing but a foreign country. He knew that Canaan 
above, in which Jerusalem already had foundations, was 
really his native land. Hence both he and his posterity 
confessed themselves strangers and pilgrims on the earth, 
that is, foreigners, abroad from home. " Now they that 
say such things," continues the Apostle, " declare plainly 
that they seek fatherland." Any man who calls himself 
a pilgrim and stranger, declares plainly that he is not at 
home, but expects to return to his native land. 

The word irarpiha (patrida), used by the Apostle, and 
in the common version tamely rendered " a country," 
properly means one's own country, or fatherland. 

This is the word Homer constantly uses in describing 
the emotions of Ulysses, for years an exile from Ithaca, 

" And inly pining for his native shore." 

• What the Apostle means to say is, that Abraham and 
his faithful descendants, in calling themselves strangers 
and pilgrims, even in Canaan, declared plainly they sought 
their native land, or fatherland : and, lest it should be 
thought Chaldaea was meant, he says, if it had been that, 
they might have had opportunity to have returned, " but 
now they seek a better fatherland, even a heavenly; where- 
fore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he 
hath prepared for them a city.". 

They confessed heaven to be their native country, and 
God was well pleased with them on that account. God 
had prepared the place for them, and was preparing them 



HEAVENLY FATHEKLAND. 157 

for it. God had excited a divine homesickness in their 
breast, and now, as with dying accents they sighed, 

" mother clear, Jerusalem, 
When shall I come to thee, 
When shall my labors have an end, 
Thy joys when shall I see 1 " 

he was not ashamed of them for it. It may perhaps be 
said that they called heaven fatherland in a loose figura- 
tive sense, as Christians now do when they sing, 

" Eise, my soul, and stretch thy wings, 
Thy better portion trace ; 
Rise from transitory things, 

Towards heaven, thy native place." 

But the evidence to the contrary is quite conclusive. 

Philo was a Jewish scholar of distinction, nearly contem- 
porary with Paul, and his testimony is decisive. " Moses 
and other good men wrhile on earth were living abroad 

from home, in a kind of expatriation from heaven 

And while they dwelt in the body, they looked down on 
things seen and temporal, and urged their way back again 
■whence they originally came, and call that heavenly re- 
gion in which is their citizenship, fatherland (patrida), 
but this earthly in which they live, a foreign land." 
Again, " Our soul, having lost its heavenly mansion, came 
down into this earthly body as into a foreign place." 

Now no historian doubts what Philo's belief was. No 
common reader can be at a loss. Yet the manner in 
which he and Paul speak on this subject is strikingly 
similar. Their use of such terms as "citizenship," "fa- 
therland," "abroad from home," "foreign land," indeed, 
their whole style and phraseology, is so alike that it seems 
impossible not to believe they thought alike. 

How momentous, then, the inference ! We have noth- 
ing less than the Holy Spirit's declaration, that this was 
the confession of faith of the whole Abrahamic Church, 



158 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

with which God Avas well pleased. So that it is hut an 
echo of the ancient belief still lingering among us, when 
we sing, 

" Though in a foreign land, 
Wc arc not far from home, 
And nearer to our house above 
Wc every moment come." 

This ancient confession, we now observe, was fully sanc- 
tioned by Christ. Let it be remembered, that we have 
proved the pre-existence of Christ as man. By general 
consent, we showed the title " Son of Man " relates to 
him in his human nature. By general consent, it is denied 
that his Divine nature did descend. Either, therefore, 
Christ as man descended from heaven, or nothing de- 
scended. 

The pre-existence of Christ is the one idea of the Gos- 
pels. It is this that gives tone to our Saviour's whole life. 
The feeling of having "come from above," and come 
"to give his flesh for the life of the world," imbues all 
his words and actions* with a peculiarly sweet and tender 
mystery, making him, though full of joy in communion 
with the Father, yet a man of sorrows and acquainted 
with grief. 

Now it is a principle, of science that a trait being fairly 
proved inherent in, and essentially characteristic of, an in- 
dividual, is proved of the species. Tims the resurrection 
without subsequent death being established in a single in- 
stance, is held established for the race. It is universally 
admitted that one well-authenticated instance is enough to 
establish the immortality of the entire race. 

On the same principle, Jesus, by indorsing the ancient 
belief in respect to himself, virtually indorsed it for the 
race. 

If the Son of Man came from heaven, a fortiori, man 
came from heaven. If he came for the express purpose 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 159 

of being their Redeemer, in the sense prepared in the 
law, prefigured at the exodus, and intensified in the re- 
turn from Babylon, then, a fortiori, those he came to 
redeem were already exiles from their native land. 

In Luke xv. he gives three parables, all turning on the 
same point. 

A man loses one out of a hundred sheep, goes after it, 
brings it back, and calls his neighbors to rejoice. So Christ, 
the Son of Man, the good Shepherd, had his hundred 
sheep in the heavenly fold ; one of them was lost ; he came 
after it, to seek and save, to give his life for the sheep, and 
bring them back, that there might be one fold and one 
shepherd. And the point of the illustration is, that the 
angels will feel more joy over the return of man to heaven 
than over all the unfallen orders that never went away. 

So the woman has ten pieces, loses one, finds it, and 
rejoices. The woman is "Jerusalem above, mother of us 
all." (Gal. iv. 26.) And the point of the illustration is, 
the more joy there will be over those restored to citizen- 
ship than over those that never lost it. 

So the father has two sons. One goes away, the other 
stays at home. After a life of dissipation and bondage the 
prodigal comes back, and is not only welcomed, but treated 
as if he were the first-born, and had the birthright. And 
the point is, that it is meet to rejoice more over one who 
comes back than over one who went not away. It is in 
heaven that there is " more joy." It is in the Father's 
house on high that there is festive mirth. It is man — once 
in heaven, but long lost, long a prodigal and a slave — that 
comes back at last, and receives the primogeniture of the 
skies. 

The angels will not murmur at seeing man exalted 
above them. But if they should, God would quickly 
soothe each jealous feeling, by saying, " It is meet that we 
should rejoice, for this my son and thy brother was dead, 



160 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

but is alive again, was lost, but is found." There is some- 
thing in a return home after long absence, a return to life 
and purity and peace and power, peculiarly adapted to 
excite joy in every benevolent mind, especially in the mind 
of infinite benevolence, the mind of God. 

In these parables, and in many other places, Christ nat- 
urally and unaffectedly spoke on the basis of the ancient 
faith, that heaven is our native land. That was the exist- 
ing faith. He simply recognized it as such, and, standing 
upon it, developed the precious thought of his redeeming 
errand. We are here as exiles, not to be punished, but 
saved. He is here, not to inflict judgment, but to redeem 
and carry us back to our native clime and inheritance. 
Life is not penal, but remedial. This world is not a prison, 
but a world of redeeming grace, built by the Mediator, 
and for him. He placed us here, and in the fulness of 
time came hither after us, bore our sins in his own body 
on the tree, and in the morning of the resurrection will 
present us to himself, a glorious Church, not having a 
spot or wrinkle or any such thing. O for hearts of love 
to sing, 

" Jesus sought me when a stranger, 
Wandering from the fold of God, 
He, to rescue me from danger, 
Interposed his precious blood." 

This idea of redemption as a return to heaven, accom- 
plished by an atoning Redeemer, may be called the plot of 
the august drama of the Word of God. It is this that gives 
unity to the Bible, and makes it, out of many books, com- 
posed by many authors, through a period of fifteen centu- 
ries, more truly one than any other book in existence. The 
Bible opens with this theme proposed in Genesis, and closes 
with it resolved in the Revelation, and Calvary stands mid- 
way between. In Genesis we see an emblematic paradise 
and its wedded pair ; in the Revelation, an emblematic par- 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 161 

adise, and a wedded pair. In Genesis, the wedded pair are 
driven out ; in the Revelation, they are brought back. 

In the one case the right to the tree of life is taken 
away ; in the other, it is restored. In the one case they 
are naked; in the other, clothed in white raiment, the 
righteousness of saints. In the beginning, there is a ser- 
pent victorious ; at the end, the serpent has been cast into 
the lake of fire. That the Book of Revelation is highly 
symbolic, and that paradise there is emblematic of heaven, 
all perceive. But if paradise be a symbol of heaven in 
Revelation, of what is it a symbol in Genesis ? If entering 
it, at last, means going to heaven, what does being " driven 
out " of it, at first, mean ? If gaining a right unto the tree 
of life denotes access to God, what does the taking away 
that right denote ? If the symbols of the Apocalypse teach 
that heaven is to be our home, why do not those of Gen- 
esis teach that it has been our home ? 

Hence, in the final picture of redemption are united all 
the main outlines of all former pictures. From the year 
of jubilee is taken the sounding of the seventh trumpet. 
From the exodus is taken the song of Moses and the Lamb. 
From the seventy years' captivity is taken the spiritual 
Babylon, and the escape of God's people into the New 
Jerusalem. All former emblems of redemption are here 
wrought up in one surpassingly gorgeous panorama, — at 
once paradise regained, Canaan revisited, Jerusalem rebuilt, 
the jubilee of ages brought in. 

This is redemption. On this all that is peculiar in Gospel 
doctrine, as distinguished from naturalism, is based. On 
this all the technical terms of the system are formed. Man 
has forgotten God, he must remember him. He is out of 
his senses, he must come to himself. Alienated from his 
Heavenly Father, he must be reconciled. Rebellious, he 
must submit. Asleep, he must awake, and, dead in sin, 
he must be raised. Havino; formed habits of sin, he must 



162 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

be born again, and be brought into those states of feeling 
and obedience he had, when as a child he played about 
his father's knee in the heavenly home. He is, indeed, 
bankrupt, but his kinsman-Redeemer has purchased his 
property, and holds it for him until the redemption, or jubi- 
lee, when every man shall return unto his own family and 
his own inheritance. He is a captive, a prisoner, a slave ; 
but his Redeemer has conquered his oppressor, has ran- 
somed him with his own life, and the time draws nigh when 
the edict of final emancipation shall be carried into full 
effect, and the last scar and vestige of chains be eternally 
effaced from the free limbs of the emancipated and glorified 
sons of God. 

There is no technical term of the Evangelical system 
which does not really imply a return to former holiness and 
bliss, and which does not receive new fulness and force of 
meaning by the distinct perception of that sublime fact. 

After the age of the Apostles, the ancient belief on this 
subject still continued to be held in the Christian Church for 
three centuries. Origen, in the fourth century, speaks of it 
as the catholic, or universal belief, and it is found in the 
writings of Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Arno- 
bius. Pierius, Pamphilus, Eusebius, Methodius, Nemesius, 
Synesius, Hilary, and Prudentius. 

But the philosophic bearings of this truth were early 
hid, and the belief itself degraded by the mistaken principle 
that this world is a world of punishment. 

As the Papacy rose, the ancient belief, being corrupted 
by the mistake referred to, and by other causes, was gradu- 
ally displaced from practical effect upon theological systems, 
and at length, about the middle of the sixth century, when 
the Papacy came to a head, this doctrine was first publicly 
condemned. The Council of Constantinople decreed, in 
substance, that if any man believed that souls originally 
existed in heaven, and cooled down from the love of God, 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 163 

and were sent into this world, he should be accursed. Thus 
the man of sin trod this torch of salvation in the dust, and 
since that time it has never been rekindled. 

The Church has held, and still holds, speculatively, an 
opposite theory. Bat, as we have seen, in her hymns, the 
heart of the Church still clings to an idea she repudiates 
with her head. Metaphysically the Church is deceived ; 
but her devotional instincts are loyal to the ancient faith. 
Those hymns that contain this thought are always popular, 
and always effective, just in proportion to the intensity of 
spiritual life. There is a chord in every pious heart that 
thrills and vibrates as the breath of such hymns passes over 
it, with fitful, mysterious iEolian harmonies. The saint 
experiences a penetrating, poignant pleasure, he knows not 
why, in chanting : 

" Shall aught beguile us on the road, 
When we are walking hack to God ? 
For strangers into life we come, 
And dying is but going home." 

Such hymns are peculiarly dear in seasons of revival. 
There are hymns constructed on the opposite hypothesis, 
but they are destitute of poetic fire, and are never sung. 
Nor is it the poetry only of the Church that is loyal to the 
ancient faith. Her impassioned prose is also tinged with it. 
One is struck with astonishment, sometimes, at meeting in 
the writings of eminent divines passages like the following, 
by Dr. Spring : — 

" It would seem as though the soul of man had not lost 
all impressions of what it once was ; that there still clings 
to it the instinctive and indestructible thought of its high 
origin and its ultimate destination. And there is still to be 
found in it a confused, and, in some sort, irrepressible seek- 
ing after God. It is a wanderer, an exile ; yet in seeking to 
find its way back to its native skies, it only plunges deeper 
into the dark wilderness." 



1G4 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

So Augustine, the father, as it were, of the opposite 
theory on this subject, says, addressing Jerusalem above : 
" Let my wayfaring sigh after thee ! I have gone astray 
like a lost sheep, yet upon the shoulders of my Shepherd I 
hope to be brought back unto thee, .... Jerusalem, my 
country, my mother ; nor will I be turned away till thou 
gather all that I am from this dispersed, this disordered 
state, into the peace of that our dear mother, where are the 
first-fruits of my spirit already." 

Such passages occur frequently in animated revival 
preaching, or in moments of elevated composition, when 
the trammels of metaphysical training fall off, and the soul, 
yielding to impulses deep, mysterious, inscrutable, mounts 
up with wings as eagles, reminding us of the sentiment, — 

" Rivers to the ocean run, 

Nor stay in all their course, 
Fires, ascending, seek the sun, 

Both speed them to their source. 
So a soul that 's born of God, 

Pants to view his glorious face, 
Upward tends to his abode, 

To rest in his embrace." 

Do not such utterances indicate that the real power of 
the Gospel, that which has, in fact, converted souls and 
sanctified them, may be discovered to have lain very much 
in this idea of Redemption as a return to God and heaven, 
theoretically denied, but practically impressed by the Holy 
Ghost on every believing soul ? We are persuaded of it. 
And we sigh for the day when that glorious truth, so pow- 
erful even under protest, shall be recognized by the judg- 
ment, and exert, by the blessing of God, its omnipotent 
power to purify and save. 

Before leaving the subject, we will glance at a few 
common objections. 

If this be a truth of such great importance, why was it 
not more clearly revealed in the Bible ? 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 165 

We submit that we have shown that is as clearly re- 
vealed in the Bible as redemption is ; moreover, we may 
answer one question by asking another : If this doctrine be 
false, and yet the whole ancient Church believed it true, 
why was it not more plainly contradicted in the Bible ? 
With all due deference we submit that this question is first 
in order. When the objector shall have answered this, 
there will be little need to reply to the other inquiry. 

But why, if this be true, have we no memory of that 
celestial career ? We might, perhaps, ask, Is there not 
something about the whole process of education, something 
in the intuitions of the mind, something especially in the 
phenomena of precocious genius, something in the unde- 
fined ideas of magnificence that haunt the soul of man, 
and make the poet the king of men, which speaks of a 
noble past, of divine abilities dormant, but not dead, with- 
in ? Is there nothing in the spectacle of second childhood 
suggestive in regard to the first childhood ? Here is a 
man who once swayed senates and controlled mighty au- 
diences, now, 

" In second childishness and mere oblivion, 
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything." 

There is nothing but the animal left. Where is all that 
knowledge? What has become of that wit? What has 
become of that large learning, that brilliant rhetoric, that 
spiritual purity and fire? Are not all those varied powers 
still in him, though dormant ? Why, then, may they not 
have been in him, though dormant, in that previous child- 
hood, out of which education waked them ? 

But, putting this aside and coming to the objection 
afresh, we may say that the object of man's existence in 
this world was the final suppression of Lucifer's rebellion, 
and the redemption of the Church. Both objects demand- 
ed the exclusion of Satan from direct access to the human 
mind. That exclusion was effected by the body. But 



16G REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

it necessarily involved a temporary loss of memory, and 
interruption of the train of associations. It is enough that 
without such temporary oblivion man could not be re- 
deemed nor the Devil destroyed. 

It is sometimes said this is wild, visionary, improbable. 
It is uncongenial to the human mind and unnatural. 

But if it was the confession of faith of the whole Church 
before Christ, it cannot be uncongenial to the sanctified 
human mind, Avhatever it may be to the unsanctified. 
And as to probability, is it any more improbable than 
that such sinners as we should not only reach heaven, 
but reign " heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ " ? 
Nothing can be more improbable in itself than this. If 
we can believe this on the Divine testimony, we can be- 
lieve the other far more easily, and must, from the very 
nature of the case, for by the definition of redemption, the 
testimony for the one is the testimony for the other. 

A full belief of the doctrine of redemption, as now pre- 
sented, would be of beneficial tendency to all. To the 
public it is needed as a counterbalance against natural- 
ism. There is a wide-spread tendency to let our ideas of 
redemption run down into notions of mere growth, devel- 
opment, progress. This always reduces sin to a negative 
value, extenuated of all ill-desert. Sin is ignorance, mistake, 
immaturity, undeveloped faculty. The result is the absence 
of conviction of sin, and the growth of spiritual pride. 

The essence of redemption being gone, the name soon 
follows, and from one end of the year to the other, such 
words as redeem, redeemer, redemption, are never heard. 
An Arctic winter, so far as Evangelical piety is concerned, 
is the inevitable result. To this captivating, but chilly 
and pernicious scheme, the true view of redemption now 
unfolded, as it is the logical antipode, so it is the infallible 
antidote. The Church needs a new reformation on this 
point. As in Luther's time she rescued the doctrine of 



HEAVENLY FATHERLAND. 167 

justification by faith from Papal oblivion, so she ought 
now to lift and light again this torch of redemption, by the 
man of sin so vilely trod in the dust. And when the 
Church begins to sing, with the heart and also with the 
understanding, 

" Salem, our once happy seat, 
When I of thee forgetful prove, 
Let then my trembling hand forget 
The tuneful strings with art to move," — 

then Babylon's walls will tremble, for the hour of God's 
judgment has come. 

To the private Christian this belief is eminently bene- 
ficial. It gives him deep, thorough, intelligible views of 
sin, and exalted views of Divine goodness. It tends 
directly to create heavenly-mindedness. Heaven becomes 
home in the strictest sense. The idea of having come from 
there has a marvellous quickening power to make one 
want to go there. The treasure is all there, and the heart 
cannot help being there, too. The Christian rejoices not 
in earthly power, not even though demons are subject to 
him, but that his name is written in heaven, in the old 
census-roll of empire, the book of lives, where it was record- 
ed when he was born, and before he ever left home, and 
went into exile. Christ's promise, " Him that overcometh, 
I will not blot out his name from the book of life," is 
sweeter than honey and the honeycomb. O that every 
weary, wayworn traveller Zionward wottld believe, and 
learn from experience how nourishing, consoling, invigo- 
rating is this truth ! One experiment would be an argu- 
ment so convincing in its power that he would never 
doubt again, but go on singing : 

" We are on our journey home, 
Where Christ our Lord is gone, 
We shall meet around his throne, 
When he makes his people one 
In the New Jerusalem. 



168 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

" We can see that distant home, 
Though clouds rise dark between, 
Faith views the radiant dome, 
And a lustre flashes keen 

Prom the New Jerusalem. 

" O glory shining far 
From the never-setting sun, 
O trembling morning star, 
Our journey 's almost done 
To the New Jerusalem. 

" O holy, heavenly home, 
O rest eternal there, 
When shall the exiles come, 
Where they cease from earthly care, 
In the New Jerusalem ! " 



CHAPTER XV. 

THE NATURAL MAN. 

" HoWBEIT THAT WAS NOT FIRST WHICH IS SPIRITUAL, BUT THAT WHICH IS 
NATURAL, AND AFTERWARD THAT WHICH IS SPIRITUAL." — 1 Cor. XV. 46. 

IT is commonly supposed that Adam was created holy 
in the garden of Eden, and that he fell from his origi- 
nal uprightness, and all his race with him. But we have 
just showed that heaven is our native country, or father- 
land, and that redemption involves a return by a Re- 
deemer's blood to primeval place, purity, and happiness. 

Now if mankind fell in Adam, heaven is not their native 
land, nor is redemption a return. A man cannot return 
to a place he never was in, nor to a character he never 
possessed. On the contrary, if mankind are a celestial 
race, now in exile, but destined to return to their native 
skies, then the idea of a fall in Adam cannot be true. 
And yet for some twelve or thirteen centuries the idea 
of heaven being our native home has lain under ban and 
anathema, and Christendom has been taught to believe 
that a fall in Adam was plainly and distinctly taught in 
the Bible. 

Yet it has never been proved that the Bible represents 
Adam and Eve as created holy in Eden. This has been 
for the most part assumed, with little attempt at proof. 
But this is too important a matter to take for granted. 
For if Adam is not plainly taught to have been created 
holy in Eden, he is not taught to have fallen there. A 
man cannot fall from a holiness he does not possess. He 
cannot be represented as falling from a holiness he is not 



170 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

represented as possessing. If the Scripture reveals the 
fact of a fall, it must reveal the fact of a holiness to fall 
from ; it is impossible to indicate the one without indi- 
cating the other. Yet it has never been proved that the 
Bible in any manner hints that Adam, when first formed 
out of dust, was any holier than any of his posterity natu- 
rally are as they rise into life. 

It is generally conceded that men are prone to sin ; that 
they are born with some kind of bias to evil which renders 
it certain they will yield to temptation on the first opportu- 
nity. It has never been seriously attempted, so far as we 
know, to show that Scripture does not ascribe exactly the 
same character to Adam, placing him in the category of 
natural or carnal, and not in the category of spiritual. 

We take issue, then, with the Church of Rome, and all 
churches that drink of her cup, in reference to the alleged 
teachings of the Bible in the premises. The Scriptures do 
not intimate in the slightest degree that Adam and Eve, in 
Eden, were at first holy or spiritual, but, on the contrary, 
set them forth as the representative specimens of a fallen 
and sinful race. 

We will consider, in the first place, such slight attempts 
as have been made to prove that Adam was holy at the 
time of the formation of his body. 

" God said, Let us create man. But the soul is the man. 
Now God does not create sinful souls." 

The proper reply is, that create is used here of construc- 
tion out of existing materials, as the mechanic creates a 
house, the artist creates a picture. The materials existed 
before, the combination did not exist. So of God it is 
said, He can create, and he destroy. As destroying only 
separates soul and body, so creating only combines them. 
The dust existed. The soul existed. Hence it is generally 
conceded that by the expression, " God breathed into him 
the breath of life, and man became a living soul," no more 



THE NATURAL MAN. 171 

is meant than that God caused him to breathe, and he be- 
came a living animal. " Living soul " is applied to him in 
common with birds, beasts, and reptiles, in the same chapter. 

" God created man in his own image and after his likeness ; 
and by this a moral image and likeness is meant" 

Many of the ablest minds have believed, however, that 
a moral resemblance is not implied, but one of constitu- 
tional faculties and dominion, — a likeness purely analogi- 
cal, as indicated in the words, " Let us make man in our 
image, and let him have dominion." Man, as a rational 
moral agent, endowed with supremacy over nature and her 
tribes, stands, analogically, in the place of God. His rela- 
tion, to the natural world is similar to that of God in the 
moral universe. Hence, after the flood, that image and 
likeness is spoken of as still subsisting. " Whoso shed- 
deth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in 
the image of God made he him." St. James also speaks 
of it as perpetual. " Therewith [the tongue] curse we men, 
which are made after the similitude of God." St. Paul 
implies that there was a sense in which the man was more in 
the image of God than the woman (1 Cor. xi. 7) : " Tha 
man ought not to cover his head, for that he is the image 
and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of the man." 
The relation of the man, as husband and father, is in a 
special sense analogous to the relation of God to the Church 
and moral universe. It is plain, therefore, that the image 
and likeness was not by inspired apostles regarded as moral. 

" God saiv all that he had made, and pronounced it very 
good." 

So God says of Israel (Jer. ii. 21), " I planted thee, 
wholly a right seed " ; and (Num. xxiii. 21), " He hath not 
beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness 
in Israel." Such statements are relative. "Very good" 
means fit, appropriate, well adapted to the end in view, not 
morally good. Were sheep and oxen, serpents and lizards, 



172 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

sharks and monsters of the deep, morally righteous ? Nay, 
was the serpent himself holy ? They were, indeed, very 
good in their place, as parts of a complex world designed to 
be a moral battle-field and pedestal of the Cross, but not 
otherwise. 

" There was an intimate communion between man and his 
Maker, implying holiness.'''' 

Indeed ! — and where is the record of such intimate com- 
munion ? There is no trace of it in the Bible. Adam does 
not speak to God directly, so far as the record shows, until 
after disobeying him, and then it is to throw the blame of 
his fault on his Avife, — an act selfish and ungenerous, in- 
dicating anything but a character previously perfect. The 
idea of holy communion, so far as Genesis is concerned, is 
a pure fiction. But what authority has any man, or any 
church, to add to or take away from the Word of God? 

Yet these, so far as known to us, are all the attempts at 
proof of the original holiness and fall of Adam in Eden. 
Is this evidence sufficient for so grave a doctrine as that 
of the fall of a whole race in one man? Is this worthy 
of being called proof? We often hear it said that pre- 
existence would solve difficulties, if it could be proved, and 
demands the most exorbitant are made on us for evidence. 
Is the fall in Adam, then, to be believed without evidence, 
because, instead of solving difficulties, it creates them ? 

" But what ! " it may be exclaimed, " must we never 
take anything for granted ? Must we be radical and im- 
practicable in always demanding good and sufficient evi- 
dence ? The bravest soldiers sometimes have to beg for 
quarter ; why should not valiant theologians sometimes beg 
the question ? Shall men, to preserve life and limb, implore 
mercy, and shall not divines, to preserve their system and 
their sermons, set up a single petitio principiiV 
. We answer, in the words of Scripture, " Prove all things, 
hold fast that which is good." If, indeed, assumptions 



THE NATURAL MAN. 173 

were ever to be tolerated, it would be in favor of some 
amiable, cheerful view, congenial to good sense and honor- 
able feeling ; then to believe too easily were a pardonable 
failing ; but when a doctrine is proposed gloomier than 
Cocytus, — a doctrine that eclipses the glory of God, and 
robes the earth in mourning, — then credulity becomes a 
sin, and superstition a crime against God and against the 
intelligent universe. 

We proceed to show, that not only is the fall of Adam 
not taught in Scripture, but that the Bible plainly teaches 
the exact contrary of this doctrine. Adam, at the time of 
the formation of his body, is set forth by the Holy Spirit 
as a natural man, in the technical sense of that term. 

We premise here that the point is, not that Adam was 
naturally any worse than other men, but that he was no 
better. A man may be a good man, humanly speaking, as 
Paul was when alive without the law, — strict, legal, tena- 
cious of merit, unconvicted of sin. Take the best man in 
the world of this kind, and he has yet to learn that before 
God he is a sinner, to be saved by redeeming grace. This 
is what we are to prove Adam was, — a merely natural 
man, standing on the natural plane, wholly unconscious of 
his being a sinner, in need of pardoning mercy. This is 
the character all his descendants possess until renewed by 
the Holy Ghost. We are to show by the Word of God 
that it was his. 

The Word of God ascribes to Adam and Eve a state 
of blindness before they transgressed. On eating the fruit 
(Gen. iii. 7), " The eyes of them both were opened." 
This was the effect of eating. Before, they were naked 
and not ashamed ; now' they knew that they were naked. 
The serpent had said, " God doth know that in the day ye 
eat of it your eyes shall be opened." They ate. Their 
eyes were opened. Of course the representation is, that 
their eyes were shut before. It would be absurd to say 



174 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

"their eyes were opened," if they had been open all the 
while. The representation is that they were blind. It 
is no invention, but what every one must see lies on the 
surface of the narrative. 

But what sort of blindness? Was it bodily or mental ? 
There are such blind men as he to whom Christ said, 
" Go wash in the pool of Siloam," and there are others to 
whom Christ says, " I counsel thee to buy of me eye-salve 
to anoint thine eyes, that thou mayest see." This blind- 
ness was not bodily. " The woman saw the tree, that 
it was pleasant to the eyes." There was nothing the 
matter with her visual organs. But if not external, it 
must have been internal. It was a blindness of the mind, 
such as Christ speaks of in the Jews : " They see with 
their eyes, but do not perceive ; their eyes have they 
closed." 

It is such an inward, spiritual blindness as is described 
1 Cor. iii. 14 : " For the natural man understandeth not 
the tilings of the Spirit of God, for they ai'e foolishness 
unto him, neither can he know them, for they are spirit- 
ually discerned." Adam and Eve were an incarnation 
of this text. By them God presented bodily to the mind 
the same idea he has expressed in these words. Their 
blindness was just such as appertains to every human 
being till enlightened by the Spirit of God. They were 
from the first fair samples, average specimens of the race. 

They were naked, and not ashamed. They ought to 
have felt shame, but did not. They would have felt shame 
but for that mental blindness, and as soon as that blindness 
passed away they did feel it, and began to attempt to cover 
themselves. Failing in this, they were clothed with skins 
by the Divine hand. It does not seem as though much 
argument ought to be necessary to show that in this naked- 
ness there was a moral import. The act of clothing that 
nakedness has been instinctively regarded as emblematic. 



THE NATURAL MAN. 175 

Their attempts to sew fig-leaves together and make aprons 
has become a standing illustration of the attempt of a 
convicted sinner to work out a righteousness of his own. 
Their being clothed by God has been universally regard- 
ed as an emblem of justification through Christ. Thus 
Milton : — 

"Nor lie their outward only with the skins 

Of beasts, but inward nakedness much more 

Opprobrious, with his robe of righteousness 

Arraying, covered from his Father's sight." 

So, likewise, President Edwards remarks : " It is likely 
that these skins Adam and Eve were clothed with were 
the skins of their sacrifices. God's clothing them with these 
was a lively figure of their being clothed with the right- 
eousness of Christ. This clothing was no clothing of their 
own obtaining, but it was God that gave it to them. It is 
said, k God made them coats of skins, and covered them,' 
as the righteousness our naked souls are clothed with is 
not our righteousness, but the righteousness which is of 
God. It is only he who clothes the naked soul. Our first 
parents, who were naked, were clothed at the expense 
of life. Beasts were slain, and resigned up their lives a 
sacrifice to God to afford clothing to their nakedness. So 
doth Christ afford clothing to our naked souls." 

These words of President Edwards are plain and pointed. 
But they overthrow the doctrine of the fall in Adam from 
the foundation. They cut it up by the roots. This naked- 
ness, so expressive, existed before their disobedience. It 
was not produced by it. This is not the way to represent 
them as previously holy. If they had been clothed in 
white before the act, and been stripped naked after it, 
it would have represented an original righteousness and 
a fall. As it is, however, it represents no such thing. 
If it represents anything at all, it represents a state of 
latent guilt, which their blindness alone prevents them 



176 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

from being ashamed of. If their attempt to cover them- 
selves denoted vain efforts at self-justification, and if God's 
clothing them denotes a real justification, then their pre- 
vious nakedness denotes an unjustified state. They are 
•exposed to God's displeasure, they are destitute of justifi- 
cation, and they know it not, because they are blind. 

Throughout the Bible nakedness is never used figura- 
tively for innocence. Neither do we believe it is ever 
so used by poets, rhetoricians, or in common parlance. 
We doubt if an instance can be found in the whole range 
of human literature, where nakedness, being used figura- 
tively, is used to denote innocence, much less holiness. 
True, Milton speaks of " that first naked glory," and says 

of Eve, 

" No veil 
She needed, virtue proof," — 

and describes them as 

" Godlike, erect, with native honor clad 
In naked majesty." 

But why "clad"? Why not with native honor bare? 
And why does he, after their transgression, say, 
" Innocence, that as a veil 
Had shadowed them from knowing ill, was gone ; 

Why represent innocence as a covering instead of a na- 
kedness ? Why describe them as 

" Naked left 
To guilty shame," 

and as 

" Destitute 
And bare of all their virtue " ? 

Why, in short, does he picture them as clothed before 
transgression and naked after, but from the force of a law 
of analogy he could not resist, compelling him to write as 
if nakedness was the emblem of guilt, in spite of a theory 
that commanded him to consider it an emblem of inno- 



THE NATURAL MAN. 177 

cence ? But if in Paradise Lost nakedness is not used 
figuratively to denote innocence, it certainly is not in any 
other uninspired work, while in the Bible it is habitually, 
constantly, and scientifically used in the other way. Take 
as an instance the vision in Zech. iii. The filthy garments 
on Joshua denote guilt, real or imputed ; the taking them 
off and putting on a change of raiment denote justifica- 
tion. To the Laodicean Church Christ says (Rev. iii. 17, 
18) : " Thou knowest not that thou art blind and naked ; 
I counsel of thee, to buy of me white raiment, that thou 
mayest be covered, that the shame of thy nakedness do 
not appear." 

Observe, moreover, the opening and closing represen- 
tations of the Bible. It is because man is naked, and 
incapable of self-justification, that we see him driven out 
into the earth for the purpose, as the coats of skin seem to 
show, of having a justification provided. When the time 
arrives, and that object is achieved, we see the Church 
return to Paradise, and it is said : " To her was granted 
to be clothed with fine linen, clean and white, which is 
the righteousness of saints." 

With scientific certainty, then, the representation in 
Genesis marks Adam and Eve out as the representatives 
of an unjustified race, and they are made to act out a 
pantomime of redemption. We first see them naked and 
not ashamed, denoting a sinner unawakened, and uncon- 
scious that he has no defence against the wrath of God. 
The commandment then comes, sin revives, they die. By 
the operation of law, latent sin becomes overt transgres- 
sion, and remorse and fear follow. Thirdly, they attempt 
to cover themselves with fig-leaf aprons ; a vivid picture 
of a convicted sinner trying to justify himself by deeds 
of law. We see them, lastly, clothed by God with fleecy 
garments ; thus representing justification through a cruci- 
fied Redeemer. 



178 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Taken together, this series of tableaux says, the race 
now to be introduced into this world is a race accused, 
and destitute of justification, but not aware of their real 
condition. They are fairly represented by this first speci- 
men pair. In these two, substantially, you see the race. 
The object is to provide an atoning sacrifice, and through 
him furnish them a perfect justification. 

We refer, once more, in confirmation of this view, to 
the silence of Scripture already alluded to, as to any act 
of worship on the part of Adam and Eve. This does not 
of course prove they did not worship. But if the object 
of the Spirit were to represent holiness, acts of worship 
would certainly be described. This is certain from the 
fact that uninspired writers, who believe in such holiness, 
do describe such acts as performed by them. Milton gives 
us charming pictures of their daily devotions, as 

" At their shady lodge arrived, both stood, 
Both turned, and under open sky adored 
The God that made both sky, air, earth, and heaven." 

If the Holy Spirit had intended to convey such an impres- 
sion of their holiness, he would have represented them in 
acts of worship. 

He has so represented the Church on earth, patriarchal 
and Jewish ; the record of their praises occupies a large 
part of the Bible, though the holiness of the Church is 
only partial. He so represents the holiness of Jesus, who 
spends whole nights in prayer, and who, after instituting 
the Lord's Supper, joins his disciples in singing a hymn. 
" Behold, he prayeth ! " is the inspired designation of a 
saint. But it is toward the last, when we draw nigh 
to the better land, and a door is opened into heaven, 
that the full burst of praise rushes out upon us like the 
voice of many waters and the noise of mighty thunder- 
ings. We behold white-robed myriads, with harps and 



THE NATURAL MAN. 179 

palms and crowns of gold ; they wave their palms, they 
strike their harps, they cast their crowns at the Re- 
deemer's feet, they fall prostrate, they sing, they shout. 
This is the instinct, the very nature, of a loyal, loving, 
adoring soul. It sings, it prays, it kneels, it casts itself 
prostrate, it seeks by every sound and motion to express 
the deep ecstasy of holy joy and worship. Now there is 
nothing of this in Eden. The Holy Spirit might have rep- 
resented Adam and Eve as singing one hymn at least, — 

" These are thy works, Parent of Good," — 

but he does not. He might have pictured them clothed 
in white, and bowing down before God, but he does not. 
He might have exhibited some solemn act of prayer, but 
he does not. There is not a word, not a whisper of 
thanks, praise, or adoration in the record. 

We refer, moreover, to the silence of subsequent Scrip- 
ture as to any good in Adam in Eden. If Adam was an 
exception to his race, — the only man that ever began right 
except Christ, the man whose fall was the cause of the 
wrong beginning of all the rest, — we should expect this 
would be mentioned in such a book as the Bible. The 
Bible has to do with redemption ; this act of Adam was 
what caused redemption to be necessary ; in so large a 
book, there could not fail to be frequent allusions to the 
matter. 

But the fact is, after the first few chapters, Adam is 
mentioned again but twice in the whole Old Testament. 
Once, in Deut. xxxii. 8, the nations are called " sons of 
Adam," and once, in Job xxxi. 33, he is mentioned as 
" covering his transgressions." Aside from these casual 
references, in all the history, prophecy, types, shadows, 
doctrines, psalms, and varied teachings of the world's Bible 
for four thousand years, his name or Eve's is not men- 
tioned. This, if they were the cause of human ruin, is 



180 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

so incredible, as to amount to an impossibility. It cannot 
be believed. 

Other men, whose holiness never was imagined to be 
perfect, are called perfect. Noah was a "just man and 
perfect in his generations." Abraham is " the friend 
of God." Job was "perfect and upright." Moses was 
"faithful in all God's house." To Jeremiah God says, 
" Before thou earnest out of the womb I sanctified thee." 
David is " the man after God's own heart." Daniel, the 
"man greatly beloved." Zechariah and Elizabeth walked 
"in all the commandments of the Lord blameless." 

But Adam receives no compliments of this kind. Could 
a writer, entertaining the common opinion concerning 
Adam, write a theological work as large as the Old Testa- 
ment, and yet never put in such expressions as just Adam, 
upright Adam, Adam in innocence, Adam before he fell, 
the unfallen, sinless human pair, &c. ? Would it not re- 
quire a miracle to prevent him ? Add to this the state- 
ment of Paul (Heb. xi. 13, 16), that the whole ancient 
Church confessed heaven their fatherland, and earth for- 
eign, and is it not certain, to a demonstration, that such 
a doctrine as the fall in Adam was unknown to the writers 
of the Old Testament? 

In the New Testament, Adam is several times contrasted 
with Christ, but not in the way he would be if made holy 
in Eden, and subsequently fallen. On that supposition, 
the difference between him and Christ would be, that, 
while both began in holiness, one fell, and the other stood. 
Adam yielded to a small temptation ; Christ resisted 
powerful temptations. Hence, Paul would have said : 
" Adam was more favorably situated than Christ ; holi- 
ness entered into the world when he entered; he was 
free, and might have stood, and his temptation was slight, 
while Christ's temptation was extremely severe ; yet Adam 
fell, and ruined us all, while Christ stood, and saved, us all. 
How guilty Adam ! how glorious Christ ! " 



THE NATURAL MAN. 181 

This, however, is not the contrast the Apostle does 
draw. (Romans v. 12, 19.) Instead of saying, " By one 
man righteousness entered into the world and was forfeited 
and lost," he says, " By one man sin entered into the 
world," that is, when he entered, sin entered, as appears 
from his being blind and naked from the threshold. He 
does not speak of his loss of innocence, his fall, or use any 
word implying a change of character, but " his transgres- 
sion," " his offence," " his disobedience," " his sinning," 
— all terms applicable to any sinner who acts out an 
existing sinful disposition. 

The only expression that could be thought to favor the 
common view is, " By one man's disobedience many were 
made sinners." But how made ? Not by the fall of a 
righteous man, but by a test applied to an unrighteous 
man taken as an average sample. Out of a thousand 
bushels of wheat, one bushel being taken as a fair sample 
or specimen, and found to be damaged, makes the whole 
damaged. Adam being taken blind and naked, an average 
sample of a race blind and naked from birth, and submitted 
to a simple test of law, and found disobedient, makes the 
whole race, of which he was a specimen, sinners. 

Hence, Dr. Hodge of Princeton, although himself hold- 
ing the common view of a fall, frankly says : " Although 
the sentiment, therefore, is correct and Scriptural, that we 
derive a corrupt nature from Adam, as it is true also that 
Christ is the author of holiness, yet these are not the truths 
which Paul is here immediately desirous of presenting." 

Yet if the doctrine of a fall in Adam, and depravation 
of nature of the whole race in him, be true, this, as we 
have said before, is the contrast Paul would have drawn. 
Adam, with a holy nature, fell, and depraved himself and 
all his descendants ; Christ, with a holy nature, stood, and 
not only maintained his own nature pure, but restored the 
nature of the race. This passage, therefore, which has 



182 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

been supposed to teach the common view, not only does 
not teach it, but is utterly irreconcilable with it. If the 
doctrine of a fall in Adam had been true, such a passage 
as Romans v. 12-19 never could have been written. 1 

Another passage, in which Adam is contrasted with 
Christ, is that from which our text is taken (1 Cor. xv. 
42-49). In discoursing of the resurrection, the Apostle 
is led to draw a contrast between Adam and Christ which 
relates to the body. Yet, though primarily a contrast in 
respect to the body, it is so managed as to imply a con- 
trast in respect to character. 

There are two kinds of body, says the Apostle. There 
is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. He then 
gives a specimen of each. For the former kind he takes 
Adam's body, when first made. " As it is written, the first 
man Adam was made a living soul," or living animal. For 
the latter kind he takes Christ, at the point of his resurrec- 
tion, "the second Adam was made a quickening spirit." 
Adam, when first made, had a natural body ; Christ, when 
raised, a spiritual body. We now have natural bodies, as 
Adam had when made ; we shall hereafter have spiritual 
bodies, when raised like Christ. 

Now all admit that by spiritual, applied to body, is not 
meant subtile, tenuous, unreal, but rather, adapted to the 
uses of the spirit. So, also, natural (psychical), applied 
to body, means adapted to the principle of animal life 
(psyche). But if so, how can we escape the idea of an 
implied contrast of moral character, all the more forcible 
for being only implied ? 

1 For a full exegesis of this celebrated passage, we beg leave to refer to " The 
Conflict of Ages," pp. 363 - 447. It is now about ten years since that ex- 
egesis was laid before the public, and up to the present time, so far as known, 
no serious attempt has been made to give it a thorough philological refuta- 
tion. The obvious inference is, that no answer can be made. And while 
that exegesis remains unrefuted and unchallenged, it must be regarded as 
a tacit confession of the truth of our position. 



THE NATURAL MAN. 183 

The spiritual body of Christ, taken as a sample, was 
adapted to the uses not only of a spirit, but of a perfectly 
sinless and sanctifying spirit. Our spiritual bodies will be 
adapted to the uses of spirits restored to purity by perfect 
sanctification. 

By contrast, then, our natural bodies now, in which we 
bear the image of the earthy, as he was at first, are bodies 
adapted to the uses of beings not yet perfectly sanctified, 
— beings neither justified nor sanctified in themselves, but 
placed here to be justified and sanctified. 

A natural body is simply a vehicle adapted to a sinful 
being, to be the instrument of his justification and sanctifi- 
cation by atoning blood. A spiritual body is one given 
after the process is completed. Thus viewed, a natural 
body implies that the soul inside of it is sinful, just as a 
hospital implies that its inmates are sick. The hospital 
does not make them sick, — the body does not make the 
soul unclean. On the contrary, the hospital heals the 
patient ; the body is used by the great physician to purify, 
heal, and redeem the soul. Of course it implies that soul 
to be sinful. 

And since Adam's body was a natural body when made, 
it implies that the being inside of it was a sinner, as also 
intimated by the fact of his being blind and naked. He 
is the specimen of natural or carnal humanity, therefore, 
as the risen Christ is the exalted specimen of humanity 
redeemed and made spiritual. Hence, of humanity in its 
carnal head, Paul says : " It is sown in weakness, it is 
sown in dishonor ; it is sown in corruption, it is sown a 
natural body." Of humanity, as raised and glorified in 
Christ, he says :- " It is raised in power, it is raised in 
glory, it is raised in incorruption, it is raised a spiritual 
body." Taking Adam, as first formed from the dust, and 
Christ, as raised from the dead, he draws a contrast the 
widest conceivable in point of strength, honor, durability, 
and adaptedness to sanctified uses. 



184 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

And this contrast is not the one he would have drawn 
if Adam when first made was holy. If Adam was then 
spiritual in the sense of holiness, his body, being perfectly 
adapted to his wants, must have been a spiritual body. In 
that case it would have been impossible for Paul to draw 
the contrast he does. 

The argument on this passage may be reduced to the 
following syllogism : — 

Major. All beings of whom spiritual is denied, and 
natural affirmed, cannot fall, but are already fallen. 

Minor. Adam, at the moment of animation, is a being 
of whom spiritual is denied and natural affirmed. 

Conclusion. Therefore Adam, at the moment of anima- 
tion, could not fall, but was already fallen. 

To avoid the conclusion, either the major or the minor 
must be invalidated. If the major, we adduce the testimony 
of Alford, who says : " The spiritual (TrvevixartKO^ is 
necessarily a man dwelt in by the Spirit of God, the natu- 
ral (-v/ru^t/co?) is the animal man, led by the animal soul 
O/^X 7 ?), and, as Jude says, not having the spirit." Also 
of Olshausen, who affirms that, when used by Paul, 
"natural (^i;%t/co9) indicates, not the sinless creature 
proceeding from the hand of his Creator, but the fallen 
being under the power of corruption." 

If the minor be assailed, we urge in its support that 
Paul quotes Genesis ii. 7, in describing the animation 
of Adam from dust, in such a way as to show that he 
meant to deny spiritual and assert natural of him at 
that point, and not at a subsequent period. Will any one 
say, that by " that which was first " the Holy Spirit means 
Adam after a certain point, and by " afterwards " Adam 
before that point ? Will the scholarship of this age com- 
mit itself to the following paraphrase of the passage: 
" Howbeit that which was first, namely, Adam, after he 
ate the fruit, was not spiritual, but natural, and after- 



THE NATURAL MAN. 185 

wards, namely, before eating the fruit, that which was 
spiritual." By that which was first, does the Holy Spirit 
mean that which was last, and by afterwards that which 
was before ? But unless one or the other of these prem- 
ises can be invalidated, the conclusion stands. 

We come, then, to consider the contrast implied in Eph. 
iv. 22 - 24, Col. iii. 9, 10 : " That ye put off, concerning 
the former conversation, the old man, which is corrupt 
according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the 
spirit of your mind ; and that ye put on the new man, 
which after God is created in righteousness and true 
holiness." 

By the old man here Paul evidently means man, as 
Adam was at first, blind and naked. By the new man, 
he evidently means man as he becomes through Christ, as 
shadowed forth in Adam, when God clothed him in coats 
of skins. 

Now Paul could never have written this if the common 
theory had been in his mind. He would have said, Put 
off the new man, such as Adam became by his fall, and 
put on the old man, such as Adam was before his fall. 
Put off the new and fallen Adam, — put on the old, un- 
fallen Adam. 

And as the old or unfallen Adam was blind and naked, 
so Paul would have insisted, as theologians now do, on 
blindness as a necessary element of Christian character. 
He would have said, as Dr. Hodge of Princeton now says, 
The Gospel is not a matter of common sense, it is to be 
accepted with blind faith. He would have told his Gentile 
hearers that Christ sent him to shut their eyes and turn 
them from light to darkness, the marvellous darkness of 
the Gospel. 

In this felicitous conception of the subject, as all defend- 
ers of the modern theory fraternally agree, so Paul must 
have agreed with them, had that theory been his. Be 



1S6 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

blind, he must have said, as Adam was before he fell. 
Blindness is the great characteristic of unfallen humanity. 
Put it on. Shut your eyes. Surrender your reason. 
Dare not to presume to question. Strangle common sense. 
Smother your intuitions of honor and right. Believe what 
you are told, or be damned. 

But Paul was singularly at variance with all modern 
theologians on this interesting point. " If our Gospel be 
hid," he remarks (2 Cor. iv. 3-8), "it is hid to them 
that are lost, in whom the God of this world hath blinded 
the eyes of them that believe not, lest the light of the 

glorious Gospel of Christ should shine unto them 

For God hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of 
the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus 
Christ." Paul regarded it a special grace, that he was 
sent " to make all men see." (Eph. hi. 9.) He tells his 
converts : " Ye were sometime darkness, but now are ye 
light in the Lord ; walk as children of the light." Paul 
does not say, put on the old, blind Adam, but put him off. 

The common theory, therefore, and Paul are antipodes. 
The common theory puts darkness for light and light for 
darkness. It comes into direct antagonism with Paul in 
the very life of his mission. It turns his mission inside 
out, wrong-end foremost, and bottom-side up. Either the 
text of the New Testament must be rewritten, or the 
common theory of the fall in Adam will have to be 
given up. 

We submit the case to the candid consideration of all. 
Consider the magnitude of the issue. Reflect that the 
idea of the race being ruined in Adam is not a valuable 
idea. It has never done any good. It has always excited 
scepticism. The Church has never known what to do 
with it. It is a harsh and trying idea. It has been a 
heavy load to piety, an incubus to faith. If this doctrine 
were really taught plainly and beyond dispute in the Bible, 



THE NATURAL MAN. 187 

it would not be so strange that people should continue to 
hold it. 

But what can possibly be the use of putting it into the 
Bible when it is not there ? If so repellant a doctrine is 
to be accepted as Biblical, surely it ought to be only on 
the fullest, most unquestionable evidence. But can any 
candid mind go from the perusal of this argument and say 
that such evidence exists ? Has it not been shown that 
the doctrine is not only not taught, but plainly contradicted 
by the Bible ? And if so, is it not best to give it up ? 

Does not the Church confess that she cannot reconcile 
the doctrine with her moral sense ? Are not confessions 
to that effect, from all denominations, on record, as made 
during the last ten years ? Do not all sects and schools 
of theology confess explicitly, that it is impossible logically 
to defend the doctrine against the charge of immorality ? 
For that which is inconsistent with honor and right is 
surely immoral. 

Nor can it be said that we have no right to apply those 
principles to the Divine conduct. " It may be categori- 
cally affirmed, that God is inexorably obligated to do 
justly." It is as true in Eden as in Gethsemane, that 
" whatever else God may be, or may not be, he must be 
just." If to forgive without atonement would be an " ar- 
bitrary and unprincipled procedure " in God, how much 
more to punish without actual sin ? If the exercise of 
compassion, without legal satisfaction, would be " arbitrary 
will and might striding forward to reach its own private 
ends, and trampling down justice by sheer force," how 
much more the eternal torment of countless millions for 
a fault committed ages before their existence, and falsely 
charged to them ! 

It is amazing what liberties men dare take with the 
Almighty, when the object is to handcuff mercy, and 
how abjectly reverential they become when the object is 



188 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

to authorize infinite injustice. And yet it is not amazing, 
considering that it is but the logical necessity of the sys- 
tem supposed to be revealed in the Bible. 

Why, then, persist in thrusting such a doctrine upon a 
reluctant Bible? Why. foist it in against the indignant 
protest of the Supreme Judge of controversy, the Holy 
Spirit speaking in Scripture ? Such is not the conduct to 
be expected of Protestants. Have the descendants of 
Edwards and Hopkins, Emmons, Bellamy, and D wight, — ■ 
have the sons of Puritan sires abjured the principles on 
which New England was founded, that nothing is to be 
believed which is irreconcilable with the Word of God? 

Some sparks of the ancient fire must surely linger upon 
our altars, although buried in ashes, waiting for the breath 
of God to fan them to a flame. It cannot be that the 
whole Church visible will go on to make the Word of God 
of none effect, by a mere human tradition. The doctrine 
of the fall in Adam, unlovely in itself, evil in its influence, 
and only evil continually ; being tried by the Word and 
proved a superstition ; charged on all hands with immo- 
rality, and all defence being abandoned ; must surely be 
looked upon as one ingredient in the cup of abominations 
in the hand of the Scarlet Enchantress of the Seven Hills. 
It is time to dash that cup from our lips. It is time for 
God's people to come out of her, " that they be not par- 
takers of her sins, and that they receive not of her 
plagues." 



CHAPTER XVI. 

MELCHISEDEC. 
" Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither 

BEGINNING OF DAYS NOR END OF LIFE." — Heb. vii. 3. 

THESE words seem to imply self-existence. The idea 
that Melchisedec is Christ flows most naturally from 
them. That idea, however, is very generally rejected, 
and the view embraced instead, that Melchisedec was a 
Canaanite prince. 

It is proposed to offer some reasons against this latter, 
and in favor of the former view. 

The latter theory fails, in the first place, to explain the 
statement of the text, that Melchisedec was without 
father, without mother, &c. The usual explanation is, 
without recorded father or mother or pedigree, i. e. because 
no mention of these things is made in the Bible, there is a 
shadowy likeness to Christ, who had no human father, no 
Divine mother, no priestly genealogy. 

But according to ancient usage, if he was a Canaanite, 
it is clear that Canaan was his father. The omission of a 
few intermediate links makes no difference. In Ezra vii. 
1-5, Meraioth is given as the father of Azariah, though 
there were six generations intervening. Such cases were 
common. The principle on which genealogical registers 
were constructed was, where links were lost or omitted 
for any other reason, to take the next preceding link, and 
use the term father. Hence, if Melchisedec was a Ca- 
naanite, it cannot be said that his genealogy is not recorded 
in the Bible. On the contrary, it is recorded as follows : 



190 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

" Which was the son of Canaan, of Noah, of Lamech, of 
Methuselah, of Enoch, of Jared, of Malaleel, of Cainan, 
of Enos, of Seth, of Adam." 

To say that a mortal man existed in Abraham's day, 
without a recorded pedigree through one of the three sons 
of Noah, Shem, Ham, or Japhet, is to say that a man ex- 
isted who did not descend from Adam. Besides, if he had 
no recorded pedigree, that would not make him like Christ. 
This Canaanite had parents, but they are not recorded. 
Christ had parents. God was his father, the Virgin Mary 
his mother, and these are recorded. 

That Canaanite had a pedigree, which is not recorded ; 
Jesus had a pedigree, which is carefully traced through 
David and Abraham to Adam. 

Or if the comparison be made with Christ, in his divine 
nature, that Canaanite priest had parents, though the fact 
is not recorded. Christ, as divine, had none, and the fact 
is clearly recorded. 

If the comparison be made with Christ, viewed in his 
priestly office, that Canaanite priest had a priestly lineage, 
though it is not recorded. Christ had no priestly lineage, 
and the fact is carefully stated. 

There is no likeness, then, but the reverse. If Mel- 
chisedec had no recorded pedigree, he was neither a child 
of Adam nor like Christ in any degree whatever. 

Another objection is the curse pronounced on Canaan, 
Gen. ix. 25 : " Cursed be Canaan ; a servant of servants 
shall he be to his brethren. Blessed of the Lord God be 
Shem ; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge 
Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem ; and 
Canaan shall be his servant." 

On this Dr. Owen remarks : " Whereas they were 
herein, by the spirit of prophecy, cast out of the Church 
and devoted to destruction, God would not raise up among 
them of their accursed seed the most glorious typical min- 



MELCHISEDEC. 191 

istry that ever was in the world, .... and I wonder that 
no expositors have taken notice of this." Add to this, that 
immediately after the meeting with Melchisedec, Gen. 
xiv. 18, God says to Abraham, Gen. xv. 16, " The iniquity 
of the Amorites is not yet full " ; evidently implying that 
it was then nearly full. How absurd, then, to suppose, only 
a few days before, a priest of that accursed and guilty race 
superior to Abraham, and in communion with God ! 

A third impossibility is the fact that Jerusalem was not 
then built, and that when founded it was idolatrous. It is 
generally conceded that, if Salem were an earthly city at 
all, it must be Jerusalem, as the name Adonizedek, king 
of Jerusalem in Joshua's time, evidently proves. But the 
evidence is decisive, that the city was not yet founded in 
Abraham's day. 

Forty years after the meeting with Melchisedec Abra- 
ham was sent to offer up Isaac on Mount Moriah, the site 
of the future temple. Now when God interposed, and 
Abraham unbound Isaac, he found a ram caught in a thick- 
et by his horns. Hence there was no city there. It was 
an untrodden wild, a jungle, and the very first stroke of 
human builders had not been struck. 

Moreover, when the city was built, it was unclean and 
idolatrous from the foundation, as God declares to Ezekiel 
(xvi. 2 - 5) : " Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem, 
Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan ; thy 
father was an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite ; and 
as for thy nativity, in the day that thou wast born .... 
thou wast not washed in water to supple thee, thou wast 
not salted at all, nor swaddled at all. None eye pitied thee 
to do any of these unto thee, to have compassion upon 
thee ; but thou wast cast out into the open field, to the 
loathing of thy person in the day that thou wast born." 

These words cannot refer to the nation. The Jews 
were not of Amorite and Hittite blood. It refers to the 



192 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

city which was built by the Jebusites, a cross between 
Amorites and Hittites. It was not even called Jerusalem 
till Solomon's day. Wherever that name appears in earlier 
Scriptures, it has been inserted by later transcribers instead 
of the obsolete name Jebus. 

Now nothing can convey a more vivid impression of the 
guilt, helplessness, and shame of that city, as first founded, 
than the imagery employed by the Prophet. 

A final objection to the Canaanite hypothesis is, that it is 
fatal to the argument and inspiration of the Apostle. The 
point he is endeavoring to prove is, the superiority of 
Christ's priesthood over the Aaronic, — a point most fun- 
damental and vital. 

To prove this he quotes Psalm ex. 4, where Messiah is 
called " a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec." 
From this he argues that Christ must be superior to Aaron. 
But how does this follow, if Melchisedec was a Canaanite ? 
Hoav was Christ a priest forever after a Canaanitish order ? 
And how, if he was, would that argue superiority ? 

All depends on making out this Canaanite priest superior 
to Abraham, this priesthood of an uncircumcised and ac- 
cursed race superior to that of the covenant people, whose 
are the promises ! 

Mr. Barnes remarks that " such an argument would 
strike a Jew with much more force than any other person." 
He is of opinion that " we ought to place ourselves in their 
condition, to see the pertinency of the argument." 

To us, however, it seems that the last person on earth 
likely to be convinced by such logic would be a devout 
Hebrew. If we place ourselves in their position, we shall 
certainly feel this. 

What ! an accursed Canaanite superior to Abraham ! 
Can anything be conceived more offensive to a Hebrew ? 
As a matter of fact, the Jews believed Melchisedec to be 
Shem. To have made them think him of Canaan would 



MELCHISEDEC. 193 

have required a miracle. If the Apostle reasoned in this 
way, therefore, he reasoned in the way least likely to con- 
vince Jews. 

And what would Christians have said ? If Levi was in 
Abraham's loins, Jesus was also. If Jesus he not Abra- 
ham's seed, he is not Messiah, but an impostor. If he be 
Abraham's seed, he was as much in Abraham's loins as 
Levi was, and paid tithes as much as Levi did. If that 
makes Levi inferior to this Canaanite, it makes Jesus just as 
much. How does that prove him to be superior to Levi ? 

To this there could be no answer. The theory in ques- 
tion, therefore, destroys the Apostle's argument, either for 
Jew or Christian. 

The defenders of the theory confess themselves embar- 
rassed. " There is," says Mr. Barnes, " much difficulty 
about the force and pertinency of the reasoning." Not 
that he acknowledges it to be unsound. " It is not quibble 
nor quirk, but sound reasoning." He thinks " it may not 
be improbable that the Apostle was reasoning from some 
interpretation of Gen. xiv. and Ps. ex. which was then 
prevalent, and would then be conceded on all hands to be 
correct. If this was the conceded interpretation, and if 
there is no equivocation or mere trick in the reasoning, as 
there cannot be shown to be, why should we not allow the 
Jew a peculiarity of reasoning, as we do all other people ? 
The ancient philosophers had methods of reasoning which 
now seem weak to us. The lawyer often argues in a way 
which appears to be a mere quirk or quibble ; and so the 
lecturer on science sometimes reasons. The cause of all 
this may not be that there is a real quibble or quirk, but 
that the reasoner has in his view certain points which ho 
regards as undisputed, but which do not appear so to us." 

Thus does this theory push its ablest and best defenders 
to the very verge of infidelity. Such disclaimers of trick 
and quibble suggest the very thing they seem to deny. No 



194 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

person can read this passage without the painful idea of the 
Apostle's having used a weak and unsound argument being 
forced upon his mind. Indeed, it is difficult to resist the 
conclusion that Mr. Barnes himself really felt, that it is at 
least possible that the Apostle was reasoning on a mistaken 
interpretation of Gen. xiv. and Ps. ex. For, if that possi- 
ble interpretation was correct, then, inasmuch as it is lost, 
the correct interpretation is lost, and the modern interpre- 
tation on which this theory rests is incorrect, and the theory 
falls. But if the modern interpretation is correct, then that 
on which the Apostle was possibly reasoning was mistaken. 
In short, Mr. Barnes seems driven to admit " that it may 
not be impossible " that the Apostle's main argument for 
the high-priesthood of Christ is founded on mistake. 

Under the combined pressure of these objections, we see 
not how the theory can survive. And we now proceed to 
offer some arguments in favor of the other, namely, Mel- 
chisedec is Christ. Let us, in the first place, turn to the 
narrative in Gen. xiv. 18-20: "And Melchisedec, king 
of Salem, brought forth bread and wine : and he was the 
priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and 
said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of 
heaven and earth : and blessed be the most high God, 
which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And 
he gave him tithes of all." 

It has been objected that this narrative presents Melchis- 
edec as a mere man, and would not lead us to suppose him 
a supernatural personage. This might be decisive if we 
had no other evidence, but is not so of itself. There are 
several cases of theophany which we can easily imagine 
might have been told with such extreme brevity as not to 
be recognized as supernatural. 

Such, for instance, is the case of the three men that stood 
at Abraham's tent door, and ate with him, Gen. xviii. He 
did not at first recognize them as anything but ordinary 



MELCHISEDEC. 195 

travellers. So the man that wrestled with Jacob all night. 
(Gen. xxxii.) was not at first known to be more than a man. 
The same is true of the angel that appeared to Manoah's 
wife (Judges xiii.), and of the appearance of Christ to the 
disciples on the road to Emmaus. 

Suppose either of these to have been told in three brief 
verses, and the mention of supernatural characteristics put 
in later Scriptures, and we have an illustration of what is 
believed to be the truth in this case. The mere omission is 
not decisive, provided we succeed in adducing sufficient evi- 
dence from independent sources. 

We observe, however, that there is some evidence even 
here. We claim that, though the passage, taken by itself, 
might not suggest a supernatural appearance, that idea 
being suggested is not without confirmation in the narra- 
tive, brief though it be. 

And first, the titles are appropriate to Christ. King of 
Righteousness is virtually the same as the Messiah, the 
Christ. The term Anointed carries not only the idea of 
royalty, but righteous royalty. Hence as titles Melchisedec 
might be substituted for the Christ throughout Scripture, 
without any change of meaning. 

So with the title King of Salem. This, if translated, is 
literally King of Peace, or Prince of Peace, and corresponds 
to the ancient title Shiloh, the peaceful. If Salem, how- 
ever, be regarded as a proper name, it is most naturally 
referred to " Jerusalem above, the mother of us all." 

Jerusalem below, we have shown, was not at this time 
founded. It is useless to go in search of an earthly Salem 
elsewhere, even, with Dr. Wordsworth, to Galilee ! The 
mention of Adonizedek in Joshua's time proves that, if 
Salem was an earthly city, it must have been identical with 
the future Jerusalem. But that was not then built. It 
must, therefore, have been the heavenly. 

And this is confirmed by Heb. xi. 10 : " For he [Abra- 



196 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

ham] looked for ttjp tovs defiekoovs e^ovaav iroXcv" not 
merely " a city which hath," but " the city which then 
had foundations." Jerusalem below, the Apostle was well 
aware, then had not foundations. Jerusalem above had. 

We add, that the blessing pronounced by this personage 
on Abraham acquires a higher meaning, if considered as 
spoken by Christ. Already Abraham had been blessed by 
God in person (xii. 1-3), and was so afterwards on the 
offering of Isaac (xxii. 15 - 18). Between two such august 
utterances of Jehovah in person, that of a Canaanite priest 
dwindles into insignificance, while, if it was Christ who 
spoke it, it forms a trinity of Divine benedictions upon the 
patriarch's head. 

Again, the bread and wine receive new meaning on this 
supposition. There is no evidence that they were for 
refreshment. Abraham distinctly mentions (verse 24) the 
young men having already eaten of the spoils. Nor is it 
implied that the bread and wine were for food merely. 

Now Abraham was a Gospel believer. It is under the 
Abrahamic covenant that believers and their seed are bap- 
tized ; hence they are called Abraham's seed. How appro- 
priate that the emblems of that covenant should be pre- 
sented to him by Christ ! As, when the ceremonial system 
was about passing away, Christ presented those emblems to 
the disciples, so, before the Law was added, when the Gos- 
pel was preached to Abraham, something of the same kind 
took place. 

The payment of tithes, also, is more intelligible on this 
supposition. This was a solemn act of worship. Before 
the Law the patriarchs were priests, and such offerings 
were made through them. There was no earthly priest 
between them and God. 

Abraham was perfectly competent, as patriarch and priest 
of his race, to offer up dedicated spoils; and there was no 
room for any priest between him and God, unless it be a 



MELCHISEDEC. 197 

heavenly one, through whom alone he or his believing seed 
could offer acceptable sacrifices. The idea of the intrusion 
of any mortal priest, especially one of an accursed race, is 
singularly improbable and repugnant. The simple concep- 
tion that Abraham, as patriarchal priest, was officiating 
through Christ as high-priest, makes the whole transaction 
plain and luminous. 

At the same time it accounts easily for the subsequent 
existence of an idolatrous city and order. The idolatrous 
Amorites built a city, in commemoration of the event, and 
their prince, who was also priest, claimed Melchisedec as 
founder of the place and its worship, in token of which he 
assumed the title Adonizedek. 

This is in perfect keeping with the habits and customs 
of the age, and the known practices of idolatrous commu- 
nities, and with all the facts as recorded in the Bible. 
Nor can any other account be given of the origin of the 
city and its worship, that will bear examination. 

We pass, then, to the consideration of Ps. ex. 4 : " The 
Lord hath sworn, and will not repent. Thou art a priest 
forever after the order of Melchisedec." It is here that 
the expression "priest forever after the order of Melchis- 
edec" first meets us, — a sentence so full of meaning that 
the Apostle quotes it seven times, and makes it the basis 
of the whole doctrine of atonement. 

What meaning did the Apostle find here, in this phrase, 
and actually employ in so fundamental an argument ? To 
ascertain this, let us consider the circumstances under 
which the Psalm was composed. 

The crown forfeited by Saul had just been placed on 
David's brow, and he anointed king over all Israel. The 
city of the Jebusites had just been conquered, and made 
the national capital. The idolatrous order of Adonizedek 
had just been abolished, and the order of Aaron, in reno- 
vated splendor, set up in its stead. 



198 KEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

And now, while the mind of David was teeming with 
the associations of the reorganized kingdom and reorgan- 
ized priesthood, Messiah is suddenly introduced into his 
thoughts as his own seed, to become at once a nucleus of 
all these analogies. Around him instantly those ideas, held 
in solution as it were in the Psalmist's mind, crystallize, 
and issue forth in two diamond psalms, the second and 
the one hundred and tenth. In the former, Messiah shines 
the antitypical royalty of which David was the shadow; 
in the latter he is revealed, as also the true high-priest of 
which Aaron was the emblem. 

Under these circumstances, it is plain that in David's 
mind the phrase " order of Melchisedec " can have no 
reference to that Canaanitish order of Adonizedek, notori- 
ously of pagan origin, which he had just utterly destroyed. 

On the contrary, it is plain that in his mind the order 
of Aaron just reorganized is type, and the order of Mel- 
chisedec antitype. By the expression " Thou art priest 
forever after the order of Melchisedec," the Holy Spirit, 
through David, meant to declare Messiah the antitypical 
reality of which the Aaronic high-priest was type, and 
the. interpretation of the phrase is decided by the law of 
analogy with the rigid certainty of a mathematical demon- 
stration. 

What the order of Aaron was to time the order of 
Melchisedec is to eternity. As Aaron to his order, so 
Melchisedec to his. As Aaron was first high-priest of an 
order related to him by blood and bearing his name, so 
Melchisedec was first and only high-priest of an order 
related to him by faith, and from him named order of 
Melchisedec. Christ and Melchisedec, therefore, in Da- 
vid's view, are one. 

We come, then, to the Epistle to the Hebrews. Of 
Melchisedec we read, " Without father, without mother, 
without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end 



MELCHISEDEC. 199 

of life, but made like unto the Son of God, abideth a priest 
continually." 

Here we are met by an objection that has turned many 
minds away from this view, who otherwise would have 
accepted it, namely, that Melchisedec is said to be made 
like unto the Son of God, and that it is absurd to speak of 
a person as made like unto himself. 

Says M. Henry : " What is said in our text does not 
seem to agree with any mere man, but then it seems 
strange to make Christ a type of himself." So Mr. 
Barnes asks, "How could he be made like himself?" 
Professor Stuart says, "It forces us to adopt the interpre- 
tation that Christ is like unto himself, Cujus mentio est 
refutation — To mention which is to refute it." 

Let us then see whether this objection be really unan- 
swerable. 

We submit that there are cases in which the phrase 
"made like" is used to express identity, and not mere 
comparison. 

When, for instance, it says (Heb. ii. 17), "It behooved 
Christ in all things to be made like unto his brethren," it. 
means an actual incarnation in a real body of flesh and 
blood, not a mere imitation, or unreal resemblance. 

So, when it says (Phil. ii. 7), "and was made in the 
likeness of men," it means real, actual flesh and blood, like 
that of mortals generally, not a shadowy resemblance. 

So, Daniel iii. 25, when King Nebuchadnezzar said of 
the four persons in the fiery furnace, " the form of the 
fourth is like unto the Son of God," he evidently meant 
to say that it was the Son of God. 

And when Ezekiel (i. 26) saw on a throne " the likeness 
of the form of a man," he means that he saw the form of 
a man. And (ii. 1) by " the appearance of the likeness of 
the glory of the Lord," he means the appearance of the 
glory of the Lord. 



200 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

In all these cases the words made like, like, likeness, 
being radically the same as " made like " in our text, 
show plainly enough that the objection is by no means 
conclusive. To say Melchisedec was made like unto the 
Son of God may, according to usage, be tantamount to the 
assertion that he was the Son of God. And, from the 
nature of the subject, there was a peculiar appropriateness 
in this form over every other for making that assertion. 

It has been shown in a former chapter that the term 
son is figurative when applied to Christ, and not literal. 
There was something in the union of the two natures like 
a begetting; and the complex person was figuratively a 
son, — in some respects like a son. 

As second person of the Trinity, self-existent, underived, 
unbegotten, he was not a son, nor in the least degree like 
one. But when united to a creature in one person, there 
was in that complex person something like a son. 

And this we take to be precisely what the Apostle meant 
to say. He who in his divine nature was without father, 
without mother, without descent, and who had neither be- 
ginning of days nor end of life, was already, in the days of 
Abraham, by the union of two natures, made like unto the 
Son of God, that is, made figuratively the Son of God, and 
at the same time appointed priest forever. 

Thus, that which is urged as an unanswerable objection 
becomes rather a strong corroboration. We have a most 
impressive affirmation of the Apostle, in the most appro- 
priate form of language, that Melchisedec was the Son of 
God. 

This is further confirmed by the fact, that the Apos- 
tle regards Melchisedec as antitype, not type. We have 
already seen that David so understood the matter. We 
now proceed to show that the Apostle did the same. 

The attempt to make Melchisedec a type results in noth- 
ing but confusion. Exposition here, from this circum- 



MELCHISEDEC. 201 

stance alone, is a mere chaos. It is impossible to state the 
analogy between Melchisedec and Christ, as type and anti- 
type, in terms of the formula a : b : : c : d, for the plain reason 
that no relations sustained by Melchisedec can be specified 
which are like those sustained by Christ, and yet not identi- 
cal with them. In the attempt to do this expositors have 
labored in vain. Hie labor, hoc opus est. 

The Apostle has already one type, Aaron, as all confess, 
and one of sovereign significance and beauty. What but 
confusion worse confounded could be expected to result 
from the attempt to give him another of accursed lineage, 
and yet superior to the first ? 

Hence we find lucid intervals, in which expositors confess 
that Melchisedec is not a type. Says Auberlen, " It is 
clear that the Apostle follows no rigid, typical idea of that 
priest, wonderful as he is." 

And what authority, then, we ask, is there for calling 
him a type? To say that the Apostle "follows no rigid 
typical idea," is to say that the Apostle does not regard him 
as a type. 

Accordingly Mr. Barnes declares, " There is no evidence 
that Melchisedec was designed to be a type of Messiah, 
or that Abraham so understood it. Nothing of the kind is 
affirmed ; and how shall we affirm it, when the sacred 
oracles are silent ? " 

But if Melchisedec was not type to the Apostle's mind, 
he was antitype. He must be one or the other. And here 
is- the key to the whole passage. The moment we allow 
Melchisedec to fall into his place in the antitypical system 
of the Apostle, all becomes simple, clear, luminous. 

What, then, is the antitypical system of the Apostle ? 
We reply, in Heb. iv. he shows with great clearness that 
heaven is the antitypical Canaan. In xi. 10, xii. 22, he 
assigns to this Canaan a Jerusalem, a city with foundations, 
whose builder and maker is God. The same which, Gal. 



202 BEDEEMEB AND REDEEMED. 

iv. 6, he calls " mother of us all." In this heavenly Jeru- 
salem he next locates (Heb. viii. 2) a temple, " the true 
tabernacle which God pitched, and not man," from which, 
verse 5, Moses was to copy. To this upper sanctuary he 
assigns a priesthood, viii. 1 : " We have such an high-priest, 
a minister of the true tabernacle." Unto this high-priest 
he finally assigns a true offering. Christ is entered into 
heaven itself, not with the blood of bulls and goats, but 
with his own blood. 

This is the antitypical system. These are not shadows, 
but realities. These are the unchangeable verities, not the 
unreal semblances. They are indeed described in terms 
taken from the shadows, and hence they sometimes are 
mistaken by us for shadows, but they are not. These are 
permanent realities, of which those were the shadows. 

There was a temporal Canaan, a Jerusalem therein, a 
temple, a priesthood, and the sprinkling of blood. So there 
is a true and real celestial Canaan, and in that land a city, 
and in that city a temple, and in that temple a high-priest, 
and in the hand of that high-priest a sacrifice, one, perfect, 
eternal, and that sacrifice is his own blood. 

In this antitypical system Melchisedec universally be- 
longs, just as Aaron in the typical. The relations are alike, 
without being identical. The typical analogy falls naturally 
into its formula, a : b : : c : d. Thus, as Aaron to all born 
of blood from him, so Melchisedec to all born of faith, 
his spiritual family. As Aaron gives his name and his 
carnal nature to his order, so Melchisedec gives his name 
and his spiritual nature to his order, for they are kings 
and priests unto God forever. 

In every conceivable respect, what Aaron was officially 
to his natural order and the nation, that Melchisedec is to 
his spiritual order and the universe. 

We next observe, that the logic of the passage demands 
this view. The argument of the Apostle is based upon it. 



MELCHISEDEC. 203 

His course of thought is as follows : In the opening of 
chapter v. he shows that Christ had a call to the priestly 
office as really as Aaron, and typified by his, because it was 
before the world when it was said, " This day have I begot- 
ten thee." Such a call implies an antitypical reality. He 
then shows that Christ had an appointed course of prepara- 
tion for his office, of which Aaron's was a mere shadow. 
Aaron's consisted of certain ceremonial washings and sacri- 
fices, but Christ's involved strong crying and tears. He 
learned obedience by the things that he suffered, and was 
officially qualified by a terrible ordeal. 

At this point he interrupts the argument, on account of 
their having forgotten the first principles of the system, and 
being thus unable to comprehend the lofty truths respecting 
Melchisedec he has to unfold. Warning them solemnly of 
the guilt and danger of such a state, he prepares, at verse 
18 of chapter vi., to resume the thread of argument, by 
holding up Jesus, the now perfected Melchisedec, high- 
priest, as the real hope of Abraham, and anchor of the soul 
to all believers. 

He then enters, chapter vii., on a more direct identifica- 
tion of Melchisedec as the antitypical reality, of which 
Aaron was shadow. 

There was a priest who met Abraham, who was the king 

of righteousness, and kino- of that Salem then having funn- 
el » o 

dations, the Jerusalem above. This Melchisedec, self- 
existent, uncle rived, immortal, only begotten Son of God, 
abideth a priest continually. He was already priest of the 
Most High God when he met Abraham, and that, priesthood 
was perpetual. Through him as high-priest Abraham, him- 
self a priest, paid tithes, and of course virtually Levi, whose 
priesthood was no higher in grade than the patriarchal. 

As high-priest Melchisedec pronounced a blessing on 
Abraham, just as Aaron as high-priest pronounced a bless- 
ing on the priests of his order as well as on the people. 



204 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

If the Levitical order had been anything but a shadow, 
there would have been no need of a subsequent reality in 
the order of Melchisedec. Christ would have been born of 
Levi, not Judah. Therefore the order of Aaron was shadow, 
and that of Melchisedec substance. 

Now, since the typical order was made after the law of 
a carnal commandment, and was weak, unprofitable, per- 
fecting nothing, of course it must pass away, that the true 
Melchisedec order, made after the power of an endless 
life, and by wliich we draw nigh as priests unto God, might 
take its place. 

Moreover, the Aaronic order never had one unchanging 
high-priest. Aaron died. All his successors in office died. 
But the order of Melchisedec has one and the same high- 
priest before the world began, now, and through all eternity. 

Finally, Aaron and his successors were sinful men, 
obliged yearly to offer sacrifices for their own sins as well 
as the sins of the people. But the only sins the Melchis- 
edec high-priest ever had were those he took from us. 
Sinless himself, a lamb without spot, he took the sins of his 
whole order on himself, and offered up one sacrifice for 
them, perfecting forever them that are sanctified. 

Such we believe to be a faithful outline of the course of 
thought. Reduced to the form of syllogism, the argument 
is as follows : — 

Major. All antitypes are superior to their types. 

Minor. The priesthood of the order of Melchisedec is 
antitype, and that of the order of Aaron type. 

Conclusion. Therefore the priesthood of the order of 
Melchisedec is superior to that of the order of Aaron. 

Technically, the Apostle constructs a syllogism of the 
first figure in Darii. The major is not expressed, thus con- 
stituting what is called an enthymeme. 

Now, that this argument is logical, is plain. Grant the 
premises, and no sane mind can deny the conclusion. 



MELCHISEDEC. 205 

Hence, however adapted to the wants of Jews, the argu- 
ment is none the less cogent as regards Greeks, nor could 
Aristotle himself detect in it a flaw. 

Its special adaptation to the Hebrew mind lay in the 
matter of the premises, not in the form of the argument. 
The fact stated in the minor at once lifted the whole subject 
up infinitely above the low plane of national prejudice and 
antipathy. The conception of a true, real, celestial priest- 
hood was so grand, so sublime, that hostility was disarmed. 
Without pain the Jew could confess the priesthood of Aaron 
and of Abraham inferior to that of the Son of God. Nor, 
however fascinating to the Hebrew imagination the gor- 
geous temple service might be, could it compare at all with 
this far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. Seen 
from this point of view, the atonement shines with ineffable 
splendor, and the Bible, like the bush which Moses saw, is 
all ablaze with the glory, but is not consumed. Jesus Mel- 
chisedec, called to the high-priesthood before the world 
began, seen as such by Abraham, sung by David, born of 
the Virgin Mary, and born again from the dead, consecrated 
by his own blood, interceding as our Head, reigning as our 
King, is the anchor of our souls, sure and steadfast, enter- 
ing into that which is within the veil. May the Holy 
Spirit lay this truth in our minds, and lead us on unto per- 
fection. May He sanctify us wholly, and do for us exceed- 
ing abundantly above all we ask or even think. 



CHAPTER XVII. 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEO. 



After the order of Melchisedec' 



THE order of. Melchisedec is a real order, as real as 
is the high-priesthood of Christ, which is named after 
it. Moreover, the order is before the priest. " Thou art 
a priest forever, after the order of Melchisedec." When 
these words were spoken, the order was already instituted. 
Christ was called to the priesthood of an existing order. 

But an order that is sinless needs no sacrifice for sin, 
and no priest to offer sacrifice ; this order, therefore, was 
sinful. When the priest was appointed, it was already a 
fallen order, needing atonement, at the date of its high- 
priest's call. 

But the date of that call is distinctly given by the Holy 
Spirit. In Christ's case, both priest and victim are one : 
he offers up himself; but 1 Peter i. 20 we read, " Who 
was foreordained a lamb without spot before the founda- 
tion of the world." That, then, is when he was called to 
the priesthood. To be foreordained a lamb, is in his case 
the same as to be appointed priest. Hence, at that early 
date, before the foundation of the world, the order was 
already a fallen order, in need of an atoning sacrifice. 

To understand the necessity of that atonement is in 
part to understand it's nature. The one leads to the 
other. But to understand that necessity, we are led to 
inquire what was the condition of that order? what was 
its guilt? how incurred? by what influences occasioned? 

The order of Melchisedec was originally instituted in, 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC.' 207 

and composed of, the unfallen celestial race of man. And, 
received in its future character as a redeemed order, it is 
the same with the Church of God. 

In proof of this we offer, first, the analogy of the Aaronic 
order. As Aaron was the natural head of his order, re- 
lated to him by blood, so Christ is the spiritual head of his 
order, related to him by faith. Hence all vitally united 
to Christ by faith, the whole Church invisible, is the same 
as the order of Melchisedec. Christ is the head of that 
order, and he is the head of the Church, which is his body. 
The members of that order stand in his name, King of 
Righteousness. The members of the Church stand in his 
name, being accepted in Christ. 

The Aaronic order, moreover, being taken instead of 
the first-born, passed over on the night of the exodus, was 
a kind of Church of first-born, on the typical plane. 
Hence the Church is called Church of the First-born, on 
the antitypical plane. And since the order of Aaron is 
thus type of the Church and type of the order of Melchis- 
edec, it follows that the Church and the order are the 
same. 

Hence Paul, arguing that the order of Aaron was 
shadowy, and that of Melchisedec real, says, " The law 
made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope 
did, by which we draw nigh unto God." Now " draw 
nigh to God " is the technical term for officiating as 
priests. " We," then, Christians, we of the Gospel hope, 
are the real order of Melchisedec, who draw nigh to God 
through our great Head and High-Priest. 

Hence, Hebrews iii. 1, Christ is called " High-Priest of 
our profession," a word nearly synonymous Avith order. 
And iv. 15, " we have an high-priest," that is, we priests ; 
we, a priestly order, have a high-priest. So x. 21, 
" Having air high-priest over the house of God, let us 
draw nigh." " Draw nigh," as before, is a sacerdotal tech- 



208 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

nic. " Having an high-priest over the spiritual family of 
God, let us offer up spiritual sacrifices." So also 1 Peter 
ii. 5, " Ye as lively stones are built up a spiritual house, an 
holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices." Again, 
verse 9, " Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priest- 
hood." 

Finally, in the visions of the Revelation, when we hear 
the song of the redeemed Church, it is, " Thou hast re- 
deemed us to God by thy blood, and made us unto our God 
kings and priests." 

From these and other intimations of Scripture, it is 
plain that the order of Melchisedec and the Church are 
the same thing. Hence, when the order was first insti- 
tuted, unfallen before the foundation of the world, it was 
instituted in, and composed of, the celestial human family. 

We have already proved that the race is celestial ; that 
heaven is our native land ; and that the doctrine of a fall 
in Adam is a superstition of the Church of Rome. The 
way is clear, therefore, to entertain this lofty and Scrip- 
tural conception, concerning our original greatness and 
dignity, as the order of the King of Righteousness. 

We proceed, then, to observe that the name of an order 
is often made to contain its history or primary idea. The 
order of the Sons of Temperance is, by its very name, an 
order founded to promote temperance. So much of its 
history is self-evident. So with the venerable order of 
Freemasons. Its name reveals the fact that, though not 
now a practical building fraternity, it was anciently, being 
sprung from the societies of architects and masons under 
the old Roman empire, and older empires of the Oriental 
world. 

Precisely in the same manner does the title " Order of 
the King of Righteousness " contain the real history of its 
own origin. The Bible reveals the fact that Lucifer and 
his angelic associates ceased to reign righteously, and be- 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 209 

came corrupt ; and that it became necessaiy to anoint a 
new administration in their place, just as David was 
anointed in the room of Saul. 

That fact being known, the very title of this order 
identifies it as being that new administration appointed to 
succeed to the primogeniture of the universe. The angelic 
fraternity was become an order of the king of unrighteous- 
ness. The fraternity of man was appointed to be an order 
of the King of Righteousness. 

It is an order anointed, but not crowned ; elect, not inau- 
gurated ; heirs, but not yet in full possession. It is the 
royal family of the universe. Its members, princes of the 
blood royal. It is a heavenly kingdom, or kingly race, so 
constantly referred to as the kingdom of God, the king- 
dom of Heaven, ever coming, but not yet come. 

The order of the King of Righteousness and the king- 
dom of Heaven are but slightly different titles for one and 
the same sublime reality, concerning which Daniel foresaw 
the time came when the saints took the kingdom ; con- 
cerning which the Psalmist declares, " Let the high praises 
of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their 
hand, to execute vengeance upon the heathen and punish- 
ments on the people, to bind their kings with chains and 
their nobles with fetters of iron, to execute upon them the 
judgment written, This honor have all saints," concern- 
ing which Paul exclaimed, " Know ye not that the saints 
shall judge angels ? " 

This order, when instituted before the foundation of 
the world, was, both personally and politically, pure. It 
was composed of individuals " created after God in right- 
eousness and true holiness," just as Adam was not in 
Eden. 

At their head was a creature who was the righteous 
king ; and none but righteous members could be admitted 
to constitute the order of the righteous kino;. Their right- 



210 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

eousness was the ground of their appointment or adoption. 
To have appointed them on any other ground would be to 
make Satan cast out Satan. Every heart in that order was 
loyal, and every mind true. Would you see a picture of 
what they were, you have but to look at the picture of 
what they shall be. " And around about the throne were 
four-and-twenty thrones, and upon the thrones four-and- 
twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment, and they 
had on their head crowns of gold And the four-and- 
twenty elders fell down before Him that sat on the throne, 
and worship Him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast 
their crowns before the throne, saying, ' Thou art worthy, 
O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power, for thou 
hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and 
were created.' " 

Carry this sublime picture back into the gallery of the 
past, and it is the order of the King of Righteousness you 
see, unfallen, loyal, adoring. 

But not only was the order composed of adoring hearts, 
it was also organized on a platform of righteous principles. 
There is a high sense in which the term political may be 
applied to it. It was a Divine proceeding to reorganize 
the administration of the universal empire or kingdom, to 
thrust a corrupt administration out, to bring a new admin- 
istration in to power. Those principles of righteous rule 
which God had inculcated, but which Lucifer and his 
order had rejected, were now embodied in the new order. 

The order stood on those principles as their platform. 
And the substance of those principles is embodied in the 
spiritual laws of the Church of Christ. They may be 
briefly stated as follows : All government is to be moral, 
not by force ; by truth, not compulsion ; for the glory of 
God and the good of the governed, not for the aggrandize- 
ment of the governing class. Office, therefore, is intrin- 
sically self-denying. He who holds office is in that 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 211 

measure and degree in the place of God, and must be 
like God, the infinitely self-sacrificing being. 

These are the only principles on which good govern- 
ment can possibly exist. They are the principles actually 
rejected by all corrupt governments, and contended for by 
all that are good. They are the real principles round 
about which the conflict has been waged six thousand 
years, and will be till the battle of the great day of God 
Almighty. 

These principles, simple in the extreme, and of self- 
evidencing light, were cordially adopted by the new order 
as the platform of their august campaign. If they went 
into power, they would go in on those principles, and by 
them. They would either go in by means of argument, 
discussion, truth, moral influence, without appeal to force, 
or they would not go in at all. 

The idea of God's dethroning Lucifer by thunder is 
the idea of an unphilosophical, semi-barbarous age. It is 
fit for Druids and Goths and brutalized Romans, not for 
refined and educated Christians. 

To have put Lucifer down by force would not have been 
to put down his principles, but to perpetuate them, and 
awaken sympathy for him. He would have been canon- 
ized as a martyr to his principles, and his apostasy would 
have been watered with his blood. 

To displace him and reorganize the universe there must 
be time for development. He must have time to act out 
his principles. The new order must have time to act out 
theirs ; the universe must have time to observe, compare, 
reflect, and then the Divine mind can apply logic to the 
facts, and carry the judgment and moral sense of the whole 
moral universe. 

God has given us an illustration of the real nature of 
the problem in our own land, where, in its main features, 
it is acted over every four years. He has thus educated 



212 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

us by his providence above the stand-point of barbarism, 
and qualified us to take a truly sensible and philosophical 
view of the exigencies of' his moral government which 
brought on the atonement. 

Hence, fourthly, we perceive that the new order was 
exposed to trial. It was subjected to an ordeal of the 
severest kind. 

Not because God wanted to have it tempted so severely, 
but because the thing to be done inevitably demanded it. 

It was not desirable to shield them from temptation, 
since the very object was to provide an order which could 
stand all the liabilities of public life and not grow corrupt. 
An army, to be brave, must be exposed to the enemy's 
fire. 

But even if it had been desirable to shield them, it was 
manifestly impossible. Abel could not be preferred to 
Cain, without Cain's being angry. David could not be 
anointed in Saul's stead, without experiencing Saul's jeal- 
ousy. The Gentiles could not be grafted in when the 
Jews were broken off, without exciting Judaism to perse- 
cuting rage. A new administration cannot go into power 
in this country, without feeling the effects of the political 
hostility of the opposite party. The very act of nomi- 
nating a man to the presidential chair is the act of 
thrusting him into a fiery furnace, in which every act of 
his past life will be consumingly scrutinized, and even 
the falsest charges hurled blazing against him. 

It was impossible, then, that the new order of the King 
of Righteousness could enter upon the campaign indicated, 
without experiencing the utmost efforts of Lucifer and his 
order to break them down and destroy them. 

Their temptation then, their trial, would be great and 
severe just in proportion to the greatness of the minds 
opposed to them, their extent of resources, and unscrupu- 
lous use of them, and the immense interests at stake 
between them. 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 213 

As a matter of fact the order fell. Lucifer gained a 
decisive advantage over them, even a power of death, 
which it cost the death of the Son of God to destroy. 
How did he acquire that power ? 

It is plain that it was by tempting them to sin. The 
order being sinless, he could find nothing in their past 
record of which to accuse them. Neither would it be safe 
to invent false accusations. A false charge may be risked 
against known sinners, for it is supposable that known 
sinners should have committed any particular kind of sin, 
but against just persons, known to be such, a false charge 
could not be brought with any probability of success. 

The only way was to lead them into sin, and yet do it 
so cautiously as not to be detected, and thus be able to 
take the benefit of their fault, and build charges against 
them. 

This being granted, it will also be admitted what form 
the temptation must necessarily assume. It must assume 
the form of deception. He must deceive, in order to 
kill. Hence our Saviour says, " He was a liar and mur- 
derer from the beginning," — liar, that he might be 
manslayer. 

The order knew God's estimate of his character. They 
knew why they were appointed to take his place ; any 
direct attempt on their virtue was impossible ; " in vain 
the net is spread in the sight of any bird." He must con- 
trive in some way to lull their suspicions. This is the first 
principle of temptation in all ages and all worlds. It re- 
veals itself in the ordinary idioms of vulgar speech, " to 
throw dust in one's eyes," "to hoodwink," "to blind." 
It is simply self-evident that Lucifer must in some way 
contrive to blind them, to shut their eyes, or he cannot 
take the first step towards tempting them to sin. His 
method then began as it always begins, by deceit. 

But it is equally evident how he must deceive. He 



214 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

could not operate on their eyes ; lie must operate on what 
their eyes looked at. The way to blind people's eyes is 
to put on a mask, to assume a disguise. It has the same 
effect as if the eye itself were blinded. Hence we read, 
"Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." It 
is his way. It is the very law of his deceptive methods in 
all ages and all worlds. The libertine assimilates himself 
to the purity of that very virtue he would seduce. The 
black betrayer of his country assumes the guise of patriot- 
ism, and is even fierce for the Union. When Saul would 
lay a snare for David's life, when he would lure him to 
certain death, he gave him his daughter Michal to wife ; 
that paternal goodness might be the prelude to bloody 
assassination. 

Lucifer, therefore, assimilated himself to the character 
of the new order. As rapidly as could be done without 
exciting attention he reformed his administration, ceased 
from his controversy with God, assumed the air of humility 
and the practice of self-denial. He came over, in short, 
was converted, and, so far as was practicable, identified 
himself in principles and practice with his contemplated 
victims. He succeeded in deceiving them. Although 
they were warned, although sleepless vigilance was the 
price of virtue, they, in fact, accepted his conversion for 
genuine. So great was his power of dissimulation, so con- 
summate his skill in acting, no eye save the Omniscient 
did, in fact, completely fathom his purposes. 

The Bible, therefore, speaks of the mystery of iniquity 
as though there were something in all ages truly mys- 
terious in the power of fraud and guile possessed by the 
Devil. We see it in the rise of the papacy. How such 
a perfect masterpiece of diabolism ever could spring up 
out of primitive Christianity, and call itself the bride of 
God and mother Church, is indeed a mysterious exhibi- 
tion of deceptive power. 



THE OEDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 215 

So, too, in our own land ; how such a system as slavery, 
one so perfectly infernal in its whole character, could take 
root and grow in a republic, just fighting the battles of 
liberty, how it could become the governing power of 
Church and State in that republic for three quarters of 
a century, is a most wonderful thing. It is a mystery 
of fraud and guile. 

All such things are instructive specimens and instances 
of that mystery of deceit by which Lucifer succeeded in 
blinding the eyes of the new order, and thus being able 
to strip that order naked. 

How this was effected is also plain, with nearly equal 
certainty. He sought to impair confidence in God. Any- 
thing which altered their view of God, and divided them 
from him, removed them from righteousness. The right- 
eousness of an unfallen soul is conditioned on its life in 
God. God only is independently good. Creatures are 
righteous no longer than they are in vital relation to him. 
Just as a plant is green no longer than it is in vital rela- 
tions with the soil, the air, and light and moisture. Any 
false philosophical notion therefore, whatever, concerning 
God, introduced into the mind of the order, would separate 
them from God and righteousness, that is, it would strip 
them naked. 

Now, the methods of the Devil are radically the same in 
all ages and all worlds. If we know his methods now, we 
know them from the beginning. If we can discover by 
what philosophy, falsely so called, he detached the nominal 
Church from God, and stripped her naked, and holds her 
so to this day, we know by what philosophy he first broke 
their faith in God before the foundation of the world. 

But it is a remarkable fact, that the theology of the nomi- 
nal Church, from the rise of the papacy until now, has given 
to the natural attributes of God an undue prominence over 
his moral attributes. The Divine omnipotence, omnis- 



216 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

cience, and immutability have been practically placed in 
the foreground, and his parental character, and sense of 
honor and right, thrust into the background. 

The character popularly exhibited of the Supreme Being 
is a character of force and will and arbitrariness, more than 
of thought and sympathy and moral influence. 

Hence Christendom has for twelve hundred and sixty 
years or more conceived of the character of God in such 
a light as to excite hard feelings and alienation. The 
Church, in all its branches, publicly professes that the Di- 
vine dealings with the human race are incapable of any 
rational explanation and defence. 

That humiliating profession is on record in every denom- 
ination under heaven. And although the Church clings to 
a belief in a Divine rectitude which she cannot see, being 
blinded, the world will not, but declares distinctly and con- 
stantly and universally that such a God as the Church con- 
ceives of is unjust and tyrannical. 

This is the simple working, by the law of moral cause 
and effect, of the disproportionate exhibition of truth. God 
is omnipotent, omniscient, and immutable. But facts show 
that it is perfectly easy to state those truths in such an un- 
balanced way as to produce the worst effects of falsehood. 

This method — which the Devil now follows, and has, 
for the last twelve hundred and sixty years, in a most signal 
manner — is the method he has pursued in all ages in this 
world, and the method by which he first brought the 
Church under his deadly power before the world began. 

Having ingratiated himself with the new order, and se- 
cured their confidence, he dwelt continually on the abso- 
lute omnipotence of God, and his infallible foreknowledge 
of all events, and his immutability, — truths all of great 
importance, but needing to be complemented by the moral 
attributes or qualities of the heart of God. These Lucifer 
left out, or mentioned, if at all, in a cursory, formal 
manner. 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 217 

The consequence was, that certain trains of thought 
started themselves hi then.' minds as their own instinctive 
reasonings. 

God is infinite ; he foreknows all things ; his power is 
absolute ; and if anything be foreseen disagreeable to him, 
he can prevent it. Whatever comes to pass, therefore, 
must be agreeable to him. He has his own way perfectly 
in all things and forever. Of course there is no such thing 
as self-denial to him. There can be no self-sacrifice ; but 
everything, from greatest to least, is exactly as he wished, 
and because he wished. 

Now, the truth is, God is infinitely self-denying. And 
when he saw that to create the universe on the best possi- 
ble principles would in fact, as it has done, involve the oc- 
currence of sin and suffering, he determined to create, 
although he saw that; because it was right, and because 
he was willing himself to be the chief sufferer, as Calvary 
testifies he has been and is. 

To reach the conclusion, then, that God was not and 
could not be self-denying, was to believe a lie, and accept 
the exact opposite of the Divine character for the truth. 
Yet the order reached this conclusion themselves ; Lucifer 
did not say it for them. They reached it by starting from 
premises every one of them true in themselves, but so put 
as to be only a part of the truth needed as premises to a 
just conclusion. 

They reached a conclusion, too, having a decisive bear- 
ing on their own character and end as an order. They 
were to reign. They were to stand in the place of God, 
representatives of the Divine Majesty. In affirming that 
he was not self-denying, they logically overturned their 
own platform. 

For if God was not, why need they be ? Why practise 
self-denial when thereby they would exhibit a direct con- 
trast to the God they represented ? This was the prime 



218 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

mistake Lucifer made. He led them by the same path he 
trod himself; he effectually drove in this philosophical 
wedge, and split them off from God, and in so doing 
stripped them naked. 

They knew it not : they were deceived. They realized 
not that it was a false God they thought of, and that God 
himself, the true God, was hid. 

In this state and stage of being, they are shadowed out 
in the Eden tableau. The curtain rises at this stage of 
development. They are already blind, already naked. 

The Serpent is already there, most subtle of all crea- 
tures ; and, from the readiness with which Eve enters into 
conversation with him, it is irresistibly suggested that it is 
not the first time. They have talked before. 

Those subtle processes by which the celestial race were 
blinded and made naked, are of a nature so occult as not 
to admit of dramatic representation. Therefore Adam is 
brought on to the stage already in a blind and naked state, 
not made so in the garden, but made so outside of the gar- 
den, and then put inside in order to act his part in the tab- 
leau. 

The overt act, by which the order, already deceived and 
already void of righteousness, incurred sentence of expul- 
sion from heaven, can be exhibited and is. Exalted and 
blessed as their state was, it involved the necessity of pro- 
tracted self-denial. It demands self-denial to submit to 
temptation. It demands constant patience and self-com- 
mand to be the object of constant, relentless, unscrupulous 
attack. 

Moreover, self-denial was involved in the deferring of 
their coronation. It was a great trial of David's patience 
to be anointed, and wait so many years, fiercely persecuted 
by Saul, before being crowned even over Judah ; and so 
many years more, in the midst of the divided tribes, before 
receiving the crown of all Israel. 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 219 

So it was a test of the patience and self-denial of the 
order anointed to supplant Lucifer and his angels to be 
obliged to wait long. That dignity was great. Their 
place and power were high. They were to be as gods. 
They were to know good and evil, — that is to say, they 
were to administer justice. 

The knowing of good and evil is a Scriptural attribute 
of royalty. It is not mere knowing or experiencing for 
one's self, but it is discerning or deciding between them for 
others. 

Thus the wise woman of Tekoah says to David, "As an 
angel of God is our lord the king to discern between 
good and bad." So Solomon prays, " Give, therefore, thy 
servant an understanding heart, that I may judge thy peo- 
ple, that I may discern between good and bad." Here the 
knowing good and evil is evidently the same as judging the 
people, deciding for them between right and wrong. 

This was the very office to which the order of the King 
of Righteousness was appointed. They were to be by and 
by, in the fulness of time, as gods, knowing good and evil, 
or judging the universe ; and this is still the Church's des- 
tiny. " Know ye not that the saints shall judge the 
woi'lcl? " 

In the mean time, however, they must not grasp at em- 
pire. It is said of Christ, that, though in form of God, he 
thought it not a thing to be seized upon, as a robber seizes 
his prey, to be equal with God. He was not impatient, 
eager ; the order must not be. They must not snatch at 
power ; they must not seize it as robbers seize plunder. 
The public mind must be prepared, and all things ripened 
to the change, so that the universe be not distracted, but 
truly gathered and united under one Head. 

Any premature attempt on their part would be fatal to 
them, fatal to their enterprise, every way fatal. They 
were warned ; they were straitly enjoined by no means to 
attempt such a thing. 



220 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

But now Lucifer, assuming the garb of meekness and 
humility, begins to dwell on their future destiny. 

He is aware they are destined to succeed him. He 
knows such is the Divine pleasure. He rejoices that it is 
so. He is weary of the cares of state, and would gladly 
relinquish them to younger, more competent hands. He 
has tried to do his best, but is sensible of his incapacity, 
and is rejoiced that so fit and every way suitable a selec- 
tion should be made to succeed him. He wonders they 
are not already in their proper place. Why is it ? Has 
God indeed forbidden it, as he has heard reported ? If 
so, no doubt he has wise reasons into which we ought 
not to inquire. 

He does not see what hurt it would do. He cannot 
imagine why God should say it would surely be fatal 
to them. God knows they are competent, and that as 
soon as they had once made the experiment, and become 
a little experienced, they would manage perfectly well. 
It cannot be that reason. 

It is most likely as a needed trial, a test of their 
self-denying spirit. And so he dwells on the immense 
importance of self-denial to all creatures. I must be 
self-denying ; thou must be self-denying ; we must be 
self-denying ; ye or you must be self-denying ; they must 
be self-denying. 

And the thought springs up in their minds, And why 
not he must? Why roll all the self-denial on us, and 
take none himself? Why keep us in suspense, in this 
tantalizing, humiliating position ? Why this wearisome, 
vexatious delay ? Does he think us incompetent ? Or is 
he arbitrary and exacting, and disposed to keep us down 
and show his power ? We will not submit to this. We 
will assert our rights, and show that we are perfectly com- 
petent to our high duties. 

And so, opportunity being skilfully afforded by Lucifer, 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 221 

the door being left open, they enter, seize npon sceptre 
and crown, and public deeds of judicial sway ; and in the 
very act are arrested on charge of high treason against 
the state. They instantly discover, then, their lost con- 
dition. They are destitute of justification, exposed to the 
displeasure of God, and completely helpless under the 
charges of Lucifer, who holds over them the power of 
death. 

And this brings us to consider, more directly, the condi- 
tion into which the order was brought by its fall. The 
first most obvious feature of their case was their coming 
under the accusing power of Lucifer. They were imme- 
diately in the position of accused parties, and Lucifer in 
the position of accuser. Hence, he now became the 
accuser of the brethren, as he is named Rev. xii. 10, and 
commenced those accusations which ceased not day nor 
night before the throne of God, till they were silenced 
by the blood of the risen Redeemer. 

This accusing power was in all respects deadly to them, 
most fatal in its spirit, its matter, and its effects ; it is that 
power of death which, Romans ii. 14, we read it was the 
express object of the death of Christ to destroy. 

Lucifer had so conducted his temptations as to be him- 
self uncommitted, unimplicated as the contriver of their 
fall. He even, in turning against them, affected regret 
for their fate, and pretended that only a stern sense of 
duty, as official head of the universe, compelled him to 
arrest and impeach them. 

The second fact of the condition of the order is its 
forfeiture. Viewed in relation to the end proposed in its 
institution, it was, to all appearance, and for the time 
being, a total failure. It was completely wrecked and 
broken. It was gone. It was no longer the order of the 
King of Righteousness, but the reverse. The contem- 
plated substitution was defeated. 



222 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

" Is this the order," Lucifer could now demand, " that 
is to supersede me in the government ? Even before they 
committed this offence, did they not indorse the principles 
of my administration ? Will God reward in them what 
he punishes in me ? Have they not now flagrantly sinned, 
revolted, as I never was even accused of doing ? Shall 
that rebellion be rewarded and my loyalty dishonored and 
punished ? That be far from thee, O Lord ! It is impossi- 
ble, consistently with the interests of good government, 
to carry out the proposed change. In the name of the 
moral universe, I demand sentence of forfeiture and out- 
lawry against them. I demand their disfranchisement 
and expulsion from heaven, in returnless exile." 

To these demands there could be no answer. There 
was no justification, there was no defence ; sentence was 
pronounced. The race was driven forth, and though 
their names were still left written in the census-rolls of 
the empire, no one noticed the fact. They disappeared 
from view. They passed away from the sight of the world 
of glory, into a realm unseen, the realm thence named 
Hades, and the gates of that native land were defended 
against them by the flash of the blazing cherubic sword. 

Their holy and beautiful house was laid waste. Their 
metropolis, Jerusalem above, mother of them all, was made 
heaps ; and over the ruins of their greatness the haughty 
foe strode insulting, saying, " Shall the prey be taken 
from the Mighty One ? Shall the lawful captives be 
delivered ? " 

So far from being displaced by them, he was strength- 
ened, and apparently fortified forever. What could ever 
shake him ? Not their release, to all created minds past 
thought even. Will God create another order ? Can any 
order be organized that shall stand against him, when these 
failed ? No ; it is beyond the power of God to shake him. 

And thus, while on the fallen order he rolls down the 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 223 

weight of infinite odium and crushing contempt, he himself 
stands firmer, prouder, haughtier than before. 

The third feature in their case was, the reality of their 
guilt. Apart from all exaggeration by Lucifer, who from 
party spirit would set everything in blackest colors, viewed 
even from the Divine stand-point with a merciful eye, the 
guilt of the order was real and great. 

They were the espoused bride of Jehovah, they had gone 
aside and committed whoredom. Such is the constant illus- 
tration the Holy Spirit employs throughout Scripture. They 
were the adoptive first-born ; they had rebelled against 
their father. They had thus inflicted the deepest wound on 
the Divine affections, and the darkest stain upon his honor. 

At the same time, the interests of the universe staked 
upon them were betrayed and lost. A false, deadly, mur- 
derous administration, instead of being dethroned by them, 
was by their defection rendered apparently impregnable. 
Thus their guilt, both in its consequences to the universe 
and in its affront to God, was great. 

Will it be said, that the temptation was so subtle, in- 
genious, and irresistible, as to take off the edge of condem- 
nation ? Will it be said it excites pity instead of indigna- 
tion, — that they seem like victims more than culprits ? 

It is admitted, to a certain extent, that this is an element 
of a correct judgment of their case ; and we shall endeavor 
to show the use made of it in their favor by their advocate 
in his mediatorial argument on their behalf. 

But at present we only observe, it was no justification. It 
enhanced Lucifer's doom, but did not absolve them; for 
there was a circumstance in their case not before noticed, 
which it is time now to consider. It is this. Though we 
have spoken of the order as a unit in its fall, there was one 
exception. One creature there was, in the language of the 
poet, 

" Faithful found among the faithless, 
Faithful only he," — 



224 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

and that was the creature-head of the order, afterwards 
united with the second person of the trinity as the Son of 
God. 

This individual, not yet deified, a creature human like 
the rest, in no wise superior in nature or faculty to his 
brethren, hut of exactly the same make and pattern as 
they, had stood fast. 

Lucifer had not blinded his eyes in the least. His right- 
eousness had not been stripped off, and when the whole 
order went with a rush into apostasy, he stemmed the tide. 
Thus he alone resisted, not only all the power of Lucifer 
and the angelic dynasty, but the more infectious contagion 
of his own order. 

But if he stood, they could have stood. If it was possi- 
ble for one, it was for another, for they were all alike, 
naturally. Nay, it would have been vastly easier for all to 
have resisted in concert, than it was for one to stand alone 
against combined numbers. His innocence enhances their 
guilt, therefore. Their guilt is seen by contrast to be real 
and deep, and without any valid excuse or justification. 

The fourth feature of the situation of the order was the 
appointment of a priest and sacrifice. As a reward for his 
obedience, that creature-head of the order was now taken 
up into peculiar and eternal union with the second person 
of the trinity, thus constituting a complex person, both God 
and man, to whom it was said by the Father, " Thou art my 
son ; this day have I begotten thee " ; and at the same time, 
" Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec." 

Visibly he was but a creature still. The change that had 
passed upon him was not cognizable to celestial senses. To 
see in him an infinite nature was possible only to the eye 
of faith. Creatures could see only the glorious humanity 
they had seen before. They could believe that that hu- 
manity had now become the form of God, brightness of the 
Father's glory, and express image of his person. But this 
was faith, not sight. 



THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC. 225 

From various intimations of Scripture, moreover, we are 
led to the belief, that his anointing to the headship of the 
universe was in a manner private. As David was anointed 
privately, and unknown to Saul, so Christ was anointed pri- 
vately, unknown to Lucifer. 

This anointing, especially in its sacerdotal and sacrificial 
aspect, is the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the 
world unto our glory, — which none of the princes of this 
world knew ; for had they known it, they would not have 
crucified the Lord of glory. (1 Cor. ii. 7, 8.) 

But while Lucifer was excluded from the Divine councils, 
and while the plan of redemption was " from the beginning 
of the world hid in God " from principalities and powers 
(Eph. hi. 9), nevertheless, in those astonishing words, 
" Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchise- 
dec," the amazing fact was implied, that, though the order 
was fallen, gone, under power of death, it was not aban- 
doned. God had not let go his hold upon it. He would 
not give it up. Lucifer thought he had. The universe 
thought so. The order thought so themselves. But God's 
thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor his ways as our ways. 
Then, when there was no eye to pity and no arm to save, 
his eye pitied and his arm wrought salvation. Then he 
laid help upon One that is mighty, saying, " Save them 
from going down to the pit, for I have found a ransom." 
The Mediator joyfully accepted the charge. He became 
surety for his order. He became responsible for them. 
He assumed their debts, took all their sins on his own head, 
all their odium and disgrace on his own name, and pledged 
his kingly word to satisfy all claims on their account. 
He would do all that Avas necessary to atone for them, 
and make it every way consistent to restore them to their 
standing, and carry out that design of substituted birthright 
which had bean interrupted, and apparently defeated. 

In a word, he engaged to begin, conduct, and finish a 

10* o 



226 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

grand mediatorial economy, or plan of redemption, which 
should destroy Satan and his angels, and unite the whole 
universe under himself and his redeemed bride, the glorious 
order of the King of Righteousness. 

Such was the condition into which the order came, sub- 
ject to the deadly accusing power of Lucifer, but provided 
with a mediatorial advocate to manage their defence. Under 
total forfeiture in their own name, yet holding title in the 
name of another, their head. Guilty, and utterly destitute 
of justification, yet provided with an infinite atoning high- 
priest and sacrifice. The end of their institution frustrated, 
and the order a wreck, yet a plan devised by which the lost 
order should be saved, and the frustrated end accomplished 
with additional glory and exaltation. 

Such was the state of the fallen order out of which the 
preparation of this world and introduction of man arose, 
and all the dispensations of time. Such is its state now, 
though the vast process is wellnigh accomplished. 

The day of exile is nearly ended. The hour draws nigh, 
when that same mighty Power that raised Christ to the 
right hand will raise his body, his bride, the Church, and 
glorify her with him far above principalities and powers, 
and every name that is named, not only in this world, but 
in the world that is to come. 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



THE ORDEAL. 



" Who, foe the joy that was set before him, endured the cross, 
despising the shame." — Heb. xii. 2. 

IT is obvious that, in undertaking the redemption of his 
order, Christ undertook a difficult, a dangerous, a ne- 
cessarily painful work. 

To undertake the rescue of the order was to become the 
object of the concentrated jealousy and revenge of the 
reigning angelic dynasty of the universe, with Lucifer at its 
head. To appoint him to that undertaking was to appoint 
him to be bruised, as it is written, " Thou shalt bruise his 
heel," and "it pleased the Lord to bruise him." If it 
pleased the Lord to anoint him priest of the ruined order, 
it pleased him to put him where he would inevitably be 
bruised by the serpent's deadly fangs. 

All this Christ must have clearly foreseen, so that antici- 
pation becomes an important element to be considered in 
musing upon his ordeal. 

It often happens that anticipated evil inflicts more sorrow 
than the reality. Indeed, anticipation is rarely proportion- 
ate to after experience. We apprehend too little or forbode 
too much. The vividness of our presentiments, therefore, 
is no sure criterion of impending tribulation. Not so, how- 
ever, in the case before us. Anticipation here was infallible, 
and a sure gauge of the magnitude of the ordeal. 

Hence, if we consider a moment that anticipation in the 
mind of Christ, we may judge somewhat of the crisis fore- 
seen and prepared for. 



228 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

It was an anticipation dating far back in eternity. It 
was no hasty scheme, no ill-considered project. As far 
back in the past as before the foundation of the world 
Scripture assures vis the anticipation of the cross was 
present in the mind of the Redeemer. And the more vast 
science makes all geologic cycles, the more remote the epoch 
of that anticipation. 

Before the first foundation, the lowest rudimentary strata, 
or gaseous evolution, " as a lamb without blemish and with- 
out spot, he was foreordained" to die. If, then, those pe- 
riods of ages which geology reveals are vast, so must the 
anticipation be which bridged their mighty duration. 

And if we ascend the heights of bygone ages, and out 
of the fastnesses of eternity look forward, with Christ in 
anticipation, some impression of the august reality may 
grow upon us. 

Let us stand in thought among those bright armies styled 
"the sons of God," who 

" Saw, of old, on chaos rise, 
The beauteous pillars of the skies." 

Let us suppose ourselves acquainted with what they could 
not guess, — that the anticipation of a cross was already 
mature in the Divine breast. 

With that conception, we behold him come forth to create 
a material system to be the theatre of that wonderful pur- 
pose. We see summoned into existence a universe strangely 
contrived to mirror forth spiritual analogies, and be a pic- 
ture world, where, day unto day shall utter speech, and 
night unto night show forth knowledge. 

Angels at the sight burst into an irrepressible shout of 
praise. They know not that it is to suffer there he called 
it into being. We know it. Borne on wings of inspiration, 
searching the deep things of God, we venture where angels 
feared to tread. 



THE ORDEAL. 229 

To them it was a mystery why the newly formed earth 
should bear the impress of decay ; why Nature's seasons 
should be one grand resurrection pageant ; life forever 
evolving out of the loathsome arms of Death. To us it is 
plain that, if the Lamb was determined to die and rise 
again, it is precisely such a world he would erect as conge- 
nial to his purpose, — a world where he might be, together 
with the order he would redeem, sown in weakness, dis- 
honor, corruption, and animal organization, to rise again 
spiritual, incorruptible, powerful, and glorious. 

Meanwhile, there must have been a kind of prelibation 
of the approaching humiliation. For though the full scope 
of the mediatorial anointing was hid from principalities and 
from powers, it could not be so entirely veiled as not to 
excite their watchful jealousy. As Saul eyed David with 
intuitive suspicion and dislike, even before he knew of his 
having been anointed, so Lucifer looked askance upon Christ. 
He hated him for his order's sake. He hated him on account 
of the attempt at dethronement. He hated him because he 
manifested pity for his brethren, and refused to join in the 
torrent of obloquy and abuse the angelic powers caused to 
roll across their memory. He evidently took their reproach 
to heart. He mourned their fate. 

The Covering Cherub hated him for it, and energized to 
cast their odium upon him. 

Long, long before he stooped to earth, we see him stand- 
ing before the Lord, clothed in filthy garments, interceding 
for Israel, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist 
him. 

With instructed eye we pass onward toward the fulness 
of time, and as we see the Anointed One begin to empty 
himself of infinite plenitude, disrobe himself of immortal 
splendors, and disappear from those realms of ineffable 
glory, — as we see the mysterious veiling of that infinite 
nature under a fleshly form, we begin to tremble. O won- 



230 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

derful seed, we exclaim, thus sown in corruption, weakness, 
dishonor, and decay ! 

How near has holiness forced itself down to the level of 
sin ! How close the contact infinite purity suffers with vile- 
ness and uncleanness ! Herein is shame ! Brought into 
the midst of sin, encompassed and environed round there- 
with, sin's vile weeds and filthy rags upon him, sinners for 
his only earthly friends, a sinner guilty and lost in herself 
for a mother, sinners for relatives, sinners for acquaintance, 
countrymen, subjects, and a world full of sin and shame and 
death for an abode. He who for ages had known other 
society in the bosom of the Infinite Blessed, other com- 
munion and service in the songs and adorations of celestial 
myriads, — O what a foreign shore ! what a sad, benighted 
exile ! what a dreary banishment ! what a deep, degrading 
change of position ! what shame, what humiliation, not for 
himself, but with and for others ! 

But if we were to examine his earthly course, in the few 
,brief sketches given us of him, we should find that course 
full of anticipations of impending fate, rendered now more 
weighty and gloomy by that change of stature. Sown in 
weakness, enfeebled by being made flesh, sown in corrup- 
tion and dishonor, he no longer looks upon that suffering 
with the unmoved aspect of an infinite being, but now feels 
the dread and the sensitive shrinkings and terrible recoil of 
physical nature. 

Early in infancy, we are informed, he grew in knowledge. 
And those divine abilities, hid by the act of incarnation 
within, and forced to develop like ours only by means of 
physical organs, began to manifest themselves with aston- 
ishing force, at twelve years of age exciting the attention 
and wonder of the learned. 

Before that time the Spirit of God had informed him of 
what memory alone could not have supplied. The grace 
of God was on him, and he grew in knowledge. And that 



THE ORDEAL. 231 

grace of God early led him, from the circumstances of his 
own birth, and the intimations of Scripture and the testi- 
mony of his mother, to identify himself as the Messiah, and 
to penetrate to the deep insight of things written of him. 

Hence, he at twelve years said : " How is it that ye sought 
me ? Wist ye not I must be about my Father's business ? " 

Even at this early age, therefore, that child's mind had 
gone through with deep and profound courses of thought. 
And, reasoning his way under guidance of the Spirit up- 
ward from a starting-point in the finite, had been made to 
believe the facts of his previous existence, as revealed in 
Scripture, and from them to infer his present posture and 
approaching suffering. 

This knowledge thus acquired was to him human knowl- 
edge. Obtained by such processes in kind as human minds 
in general obtain theirs, it was knowledge differing in this 
from that he had had before. That was knowledge origi- 
nal. This was knowledge reproduced, reappearing under a 
veil, — knowledge that could not remember itself to have 
been in exercise before. 

This knowledge, or this faith, — for he was like his breth- 
ren in this respect especially, that he walked by faith, not 
by sight, — this faith characterized his whole career. The 
anticipation of suffering was with him everywhere. He 
knew he must suffer, and in repeated instances that con- 
sciousness betrayed itself. 

It formed the key to his entire earthly, as it had to his 
previous heavenly career. He came to seek and to save 
that which was lost. He came to give his life a ransom for 
many. He came down from heaven to give life to the 
world. Except they ate his flesh and drank his blood, 
there was no life in them. 

And in moments of peculiar suffering, when the antici- 
pation of the cross and shame was most intense, he said, 
" Now is my soul distracted ! What shall I say ? Shall I 



232 KEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

say, Father, save me from this hour ? But for this cause 
came I unto this hour." 

And when before Pilate the bitterness of the crisis was 
almost full, " For this cause was I born," he said, " and to 
this end came I into the world, that I should testify unto 
the truth." 

Here, then, we are enabled to judge somewhat of the 
reality of the thing suffered, by the anticipations of the suf- 
ferer, — anticipations preceding the world, occasioning its 
existence, shaping its laws and progress, — anticipations ac- 
companying the person in his change of worlds, and giving 
tone and character to his whole life up to the latest hour. 

How great must that cross be, and that shame, which 
was worthy to be the subject of forebodings so mighty and 
so protracted as these ! 

If, then, we attempt to ask, what were the elements of 
that suffering, it may be answered, that perhaps we are 
not capable of analyzing it. It is quite likely — nay, it 
seems, almost beforehand, as if it must be so — that in a 
crisis so vast, for which he had prepared from such remote 
antiquity, on which such amazing interests were at stake, 
there should be elements involved which should go beyond 
our present capacity to analyze and appreciate. 

Does it not seem unlikely that we, whose minds are so 
darkened by sin, and enfeebled and limited by sense, should 
be able to achieve the solution of a problem like this? I 
confess that, so far from wondering why we do not under- 
stand more respecting it, I feel disposed to wonder that we 
know so much, or that we dare think of attempting to 
know all. Still, some elements of that suffering we un- 
doubtedly do know, and can partly appreciate. 

The first and lowest element, and one therefore we can 
best understand, is physical anguish. This was undoubt- 
edly one element of the cross and of the shame that he 
anticipated ; that he might condescend to know the pangs 



THE ORDEAL. 233 

and agonies of material torture, the throes of dissolving 
nature. 

And it is on this account, physical as we are, and ex- 
posed to physical suffering, we can best understand it, that 
so much prominence is given to this in the record, and 
he is said to have suffered in the flesh, suffered in his own 
body, to have been wounded, pierced, bruised, to have 
suffered stripes, to have been broken, to taste death, and 
the like. Not because these were his chief sufferings, but 
because they are those we can chiefly appreciate ; at any 
rate, mankind at large. We may be sure that these were 
but a small part of the reality he anticipated, — the smallest 
part. We may be sure that there were other elements 
of suffering connected with what was physical, — suffering 
of the heart, anguish of the spirit, that were far more 
dreadful to him, although they may be less appreciable 
by us. 

But those physical sufferings, if they were but the 
lowest element of what he endured, are worthy of our 
deepest wonder. For it was an exalted being that con- 
sented thus to know in himself what physical anguish 
might be. It was the Lord of glory that endured that 
undeserved, that strange bodily torture. This renders it 
amazing. For it was so strange an experience for him, — 
so novel, so unnatural a lesson, for one of his character 
and past station to learn so bitterly. 

Another element of a grade higher than this was the 
mortification and anguish of his social ignominy ; his being 
rejected, set at naught by a whole community, — con- 
fessedly the only community that had the worship of the 
true God, — a community to which he sustained peculiar 
relations. 

It was the peculiarity of his experience to be cut off 
from his pi'evious existence and his Divine attributes, ex- 
cept as matters of faith. In the shape of knowledge, that 



234 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

former reality of his existence could not come in to render 
him insensible to human vicissitudes, but only as he grasped 
it by faith, on testimony. In this particular, his faith of 
glories had with the Father before the world was, was of 
like kind with ours of glories to be enjoyed in a world that 
is to come. 

Ours is a faith that can support, sustain, enable to en- 
dure, but does not render insensible to earthly motives. 
If our faith of the heavenly glory were more than faith, if 
it were knowledge, absolute sight and open vision, we 
should be at once incapable of being tried by earthly 
motive. Trial, suffering, would be, in the absorbing vision, 
annihilated forever. Therefore we see in a glass darkly. 
Therefore he saw in a glass darkly that which had pre- 
ceded his earthly career. 

Had he retained full, open knowledge, not faith, he 
would have been incapacitated for being touched by stress 
of earthly motives. He could not have felt sensitive to 
the opinion of his age and country, nor felt the keen 
edge of universal obloquy and detraction. But, as it was, 
heavenly things were present with him by faith as sustain- 
ing realities, yet so with him as to leave him liable to the 
promptings of human feeling. He could be tempted in all 
points as we are. He could desire to be believed, to 
be respected, trusted, loved. He could desire the good 
opinion of his country. He could feel hurt when his ideas 
were received coldly, as new, as visionary, — when they 
were scornfully rejected, and his whole intellectual labor 
trampled in disgust. 

He could feel as keenly as another man the invasion of 
his personal rights to freedom of thought, speech, action, 
and the gross outrage of those rights when he was insulted, 
attacked, and by high and low, rich and poor, abused as a 
blasphemous and abominable thing. 

There were chords in the heart of Jesus that could 



THE ORDEAL. 235 

vibrate to the keenest anguish under all this social, this 
national rejection and reproach. Nor can we at all appre- 
ciate how much anguish a man like him can be made to 
drink in a few bitter hours, till we have thoroughly lived 
his life over again, and been imbued with the ideas and 
feelings of his age and country ; and this is what none of 
us can do, except partially. 

It must have been bitter indeed for Jesus to stand and 
hear heaven and earth ringing with shouts of a vast multi- 
tude of his own kindred, — shouts in which " Crucify him ! 
crucify him ! " rose high above everything else, while 
" Barabbas ! Barabbas ! " was the degrading accompani- 
ment. 

It must, have been intensely humiliating to see a public 
bravado and ruffian thus chosen by his nation, priests, and 
people, while he was dragged to the gibbet ; and, what was 
worse than all was, that he should see that heathen Pilate 
become his intercessor, — yes, that Gentile, ignorant of the 
true God, to see him stand forward and labor earnestly, and 
labor long, — as long as he dared, — to effect his rescue. 

Never was there an instance where the suffering from 
such sources was at all comparable to those of this sufferer. 
Aside from what faith told him of former worlds and high- 
er glories, it was on Zion's brow that condemnation met 
him, — it was where David had lived, and under the very 
shadow of his ancestral walls, and surrounded by the insig- 
nia of a royal line, emphatically his own, that he heard 
these shouts. It was the same voices which one hour 
cried, " Hosanna to the Son of David ! " which the next 
shouted, " Crucify him ! " And it was from Zion's top 
that he was brutally dragged to Calvary's mound. 

Another element, still higher than this, was, a sight 
and sense of the extreme vileness of objects dear to him. 
These manifestations of sin that were about him, causing 
him such acute anguish, were manifestations of the depth 



236 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

to which beings dear to him had sunk ; and to a gen- 
erous, unselfish heart, this is ever one of the heaviest 
of woes. 

When an earthly father first finds out how deep his 
profligate son has sunk in infamy and unprincipled villany, 
the pang is greater almost than he can bear. The discov- 
ery of the trusting wife that her husband has become an 
inebriate, and not only so, but that he is losing, or has lost, 
every trace of the manliness and virtue she loved, — this 
breaks her heart, this lays upon her soul in an hour the 
weight of years, the blight of winters. 

But what was it, then, for this man, whose heart was 
truly disinterested, who was unselfish, who knew that he 
came to redeem the wandering, and who knew that the 
love he bore them surpassed the love of earth, — what 
was it for him to find himself in their hands, in the 
midst of their lawless violence, as in a heated caldron ? 
Were these, alas ! — these wretched, morally deformed, 
and maddened miscreants, — the sons of light he loved so 
well, — these the beings created in a Divine image and 
likeness, sunk to such deeps of awful undoing, thus lost 
to all sense of honor, generosity, gentleness, and true 
nobleness ? Was this the searing, scorching brand of sin 
upon them, — shrivelling up, blackening, and blasting into 
deformity all he loved to look upon ? 

There was a woe which no earthly heart ever felt the 
like of save his, nor ever can feel. It prompted that 
amazing prayer : " Father, forgive them ; they know not 
what they do." 

Nor was this a mere outside sight and sense of their 
vileness. There is a principle by which one mind so iden- 
tifies itself with another by sympathy as to participate in 
the shame of that other. This is universally recognized. 
All persons naturally feel some degree of shame at the bad 
behavior of their near relatives. They blush for them. 
They are said figuratively to share their punishment. 



THE ORDEAL. 237 

Some of the highest efforts of poetry are given to por- 
tray this principle. Thus Leonato, on hearing the supposed 
dishonor of his only daughter, Hero, exclaims, — 

" Why ever wast thou lovely in my eyes ? 
Why had I not, with charitable hand, 
Took up a beggar's issue at my gates ; 
Who, smirched thus, and mired with infamy, 
I might have said, No part of it is mine ! 
This shame derives itself from unknown loins ? 
But mine ! And mine I loved, and mine I praised, 
And mine that I was proud on ; mine so much, 
That I myself was to myself not mine, 
Valuing of her ; why she — O, she is fallen 
Into a pit of ink, that the wide sea 
Hath drops too few to wash her clean again ! " 

In this most beautiful passage is vividly illustrated how 
one mind by love and sympathy can bear sin for another. 
This father feels the shame, the contamination of his sup- 
posed criminal child, to be his shame and his blackness. 

And over whom, then, was it, or what, that our Redeemer 
was called to mourn? Had he, 

" with charitable hand, 
Took up a beggar's issue at his gates " 1 

Nay, verily, " both he that sanctifieth and they that are 
sanctified are all of one." He is " first-born among many 
brethren." It is brother, sister, mother, bride, all names 
of love in one, for whom he sorrows, and who 

" is fallen 
Into a pit of ink, that the wide sea 
Hath drops too few to wash her clean again." 

In this sense, and in this only, by the law of sympa- 
thetic love, he bore all our sins, and took our punishment, 
and drank the wrath of God for us. 

Another element of that cross and shame still higher is, 
the peril of its temptation. For it was through these and 
other elements of suffering that he was tempted and set 
upon to be swerved from his uprightness. 



238 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Nor could that temptation be real, such as is represented 
in Scripture, unless there was a possibility of his falling. 
Unless he was' really and truly as a free-agent placed on 
probation, with full liberty to choose wrong and suffer the 
consequences ; unless this were the case, it could not be 
said that he was tempted in all points as we are. Tempta- 
tions which are absolutely impossible to be yielded to, are 
no temptations. It enters into the very essence of tempta- 
tion that the mind feels itself impelled strongly to do a 
thing which it can do, and knows it can, but from which 
it voluntarily refrains. 

Hence the vividness, indeed, the awfulness of his suffer- 
ings. " Ye," says the Apostle, " have not yet resisted 
unto blood, striving against sin." But, the implication is, 
he did so resist in that hour when, in fear of death, in 
fear of moral overthrow and contamination, he prayed to 
God with strong crying and tears, and was heard in that he 
feared. 

That was an hour when he resisted unto blood, striving 
against sin ; and the sweat of that striving, that agony, was 
as it were great drops of blood. 

In those hours, and in the similar hours upon the cross, 
he learned not alone how evil others had become, but how 
mighty was that power that had ensnared them and held 
them captive. He felt how dire and dark and appalling the 
mastery of that murderous guile that wrestled to sink him 
with them down to endless night. 

Still another element, and, so far as we are at present 
able to analyze the subject, the highest, was the absence of 
the Father's comfort and solace. 

There was an hour when it appears that it was necessary 
to the completeness of his trial and his conquest that the 
Father should withdraw, not in wrath, not in anger, nor in 
vindictiveness ; for never could the Everlasting Father feel 
more agonizingly his love for that sufferer than in the mo- 



THE ORDEAL. 239 

ment of his highest sufferings, but that he might allow him 
to be perfected the Captain of salvation without external aid. 
Then first was there a kind of sundering between eternal 
natures which eternity had never witnessed before, nor shall 
eternity witness again. Of it we know little ; but we read 
that the sun was darkened, and the rocks rent, and the 
graves opened. The ordeal was finished, his heart was 
broken, and in the mysterious and tremendous deep of 
Hades the lowest point of descent was reached, and the 
head of the order shared the exile and the humiliation of 
the order he would redeem. 

This, then, was the cross and shame which he endured, 
despising them. Not despising them absolutely, but rela- 
tively. " For the joy that was set before him he endured 
the cross, despising the shame." Despising the shame not 
intrinsically, but comparatively. In itself it was fearful.. 
It was worthy of being anticipated as it was for ages, and 
prepared for, and met with strong crying and tears, and 
conquered with heavenly shouts of victory. 

It is not as if the shame were light, of no account abso- 
lutely, and all he endured a trifling thing to be despised, 
that it is said he despised the shame. Far from it. But it 
is by reason of the vast preponderance of that joy that was 
set before him. Compared with that he could despise what 
was in itself far from despicable. That cross and shame, 
was great, but that joy was greater. That woe was mighty, 
but the joy far more exceeding and eternal in its weight 
of glory. And so great was the excess, the preponderance 
of glory and of joy, that he was able to despise what was 
too dreadful for us to conceive. 

But what, then, was that joy? What was its particular 
description and character ? Was it to be the equal of the 
Father ? That he was before, and counted it a thing easily 
to be laid aside in comparison. 

Was it majesty, exaltation, official station, and the recep- 



240 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

tion of ascriptions of homage from sinless myriads ? All 
these he had and might retain, — needed not to gain by 
sacrifice. 

What, then, was it ? Evidently something higher, nobler, 
dearer to his heart than all these. Something without 
which all these were to him not enough ; something, too, 
which could not be obtained without sacrifice. 

And what was that ? It was the life of the dead. That 
was the joy. It was the ransom of the enslaved. That was 
the joy. It was the redemption of the lawful captives. 
It was the breaking of the bond of death's dominion over 
souls created in the Divine image, but enthralled by sin. 
That was the joy. 

It was to wash them and make them white in his blood. 
It was to array them in white as his bride. It was to re- 
store them to a seat by his side upon his throne as heirs of 
God, and joint-heirs with himself in the headship of the 
universe. That was the joy. 

It was to hear the Father say in the morning of eternal 
day, " This my Son was dead, but is alive again, was lost, 
but is found." That was the joy that made him consent 
to be their sacrifice before the world was ; that made him 
consent to be foreordained for them before the world be- 
gan ; that made him create all things, conduct all things, 
endure and overcome all things. 

It was because he loved them before time began. It was 
because his love was Divine, because it was of the quality 
of God, because it was love's eternal self, unchangeable, 
unalterable, refusing to part with its best beloved, and con- 
senting to suffer with and for them anything but sin, rather 
than give them up. 

That, indeed, he would not suffer for them even. If to 
redeem and restore them, it were necessary to sin, to do 
wrong, to be in the least iota unjust, to violate the smallest 
filament of fundamental law, then they must perish indeed, 



THE ORDEAL. 241 

and he could not save them. But anything less than that 
he could and would endure, yea, count as nothing in pros- 
pect of their recovery unto himself. 

He would count nothing the labor of creation, nothing 
the ages of waiting, nothing the shame and humiliation of 
contact with flesh, nothing the anguish, danger, and deep 
sorrow of his cross, nothing the descent to Hades, if only 
by these they might be pardoned, purged, emancipated, 
brought home, and placed eternally above the reach of a 
second apostasy. 

That was his joy. And he set it before him, and he did 
endure. He did despise the shame, and he sits at the right 
hand in glory. 

Therefore it is, my brethren, that you and I to-day are 
in this house of God and gate of heaven, listening to the 
calls of infinite love and mercy. Therefore it is we have 
not long since been cut off, and lifted up our eyes in end- 
less despair. Therefore, because that was his joy which 
he set before him, the heralds of the cross are sent to 
you to say, " Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from 
the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. He loved thee, 
sinner, the Lord of glory loved thee. Thee he would 
not give up. Thy life eternal was precious in his sight. 
For thee he shed blood, precious blood. Unto thee he 
says, " Live ; yea, live." 

And thou, if thou wilt hear his voice, shalt live. He 
will be thy Shepherd. He will lead thee to green pastures 
and beside still waters. He will restore thy soul. He will 
bring thee to cloudless climes of light, and mansions of 
everlasting day, and a sceptre of universal power. 

O believe the joyful tidings. Believe the Gospel, the 
heavenly Gospel, and rejoice in believing. Ask not what 
you shall do, but, instead of asking, Believe. 

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as the author and fin- 
isher of thy faith, and thou shalt live. In his name I call 
11 p 



242 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

you. In his name I invite you home. Believe. It is the 
homeward, heavenward road. Believe. It is the path of 
peace. This way salvation lies. This way hope is born. 
This way peace, purity, and freedom. Believe, and thou 
canst not come into condemnation, but art passed from 
death unto life. 



CHAPTER XIX. 

THE ADVOCATE. 

" NOW TO APPEAR IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD FOR US." — Heb. IX. 24. 

WHEN Christ returned to heaven, he returned to ap- 
pear for us as advocate. " He was delivered for 
our offences and raised for our justification," in securing 
which he also secured his own, having been clothed in filthy 
garments on our account, but being now "justified in 
spirit " in the sight of angels. 

Having by his sufferings laid the premises of an argu- 
ment, he returns to appear in the court of heaven and 
construct that argument, to reason logically from premise 
to conclusion. From the nature of the case, that plea must 
have been the highest exhibition of the kind that ever was 
or will be in the universe. What interest such arguments 
before earthly tribunals can excite we know. What this 
must have excited before the supreme tribunal of the uni- 
verse we can by analogy faintly imagine. 

His claim is, that the banished order be restored to their 
native skies, and crowned joint-heirs with himself over all 
things, as had been contemplated before their fall. He de- 
mands, that the design of their substitution in the birthright, 
temporarily interrupted and frustrated by Lucifer's success 
in deceiving them, be now taken up and carried into execu- 
tion in all respects as if they had not fallen. He asks a 
justification so complete and entire as that it may issue in 
a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. 

And, in the first place, he claims that the forgiveness of 
the truly penitent is intrinsically right and proper. It is 



244 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

congenial to the instincts of the Divine nature, which is the 
ultimate standard of comparison. 

It is also according to the instincts of all creatures made 
in the Divine image, in proportion as they are made par- 
takers of the Divine nature, and elevated to a lively sym- 
pathy and communion with God. The need of argument 
in defence of a principle so intuitively certain, he affirms, 
arises solely from the wide-spread influence of t Lucifer's 
false philosophy, even over loyal minds. That renders it 
necessary to seem to prove a self-evident proposition, that 
to forgive a penitent is essentially lovely and good. 

Yet the Divhie administration, he shows, has been avow- 
edly based upon this principle from the beginning. When 
Lucifer sinned, God was patient and long-suffering, and 
offered freely to forgive him if he would repent. Those 
offers were repeated, and continued, and pressed upon him, 
for a long, long period, while every effort was made to con- 
vince him of sin, and restore him to the path of rectitude. 

There was no wish to dethrone and destroy him. There 
was no desire on God's part to disturb the original order of 
the created universe. Had he repented, and been humble 
and self-denying, his early aberrations and mistakes would 
have been forgiven, and he would have been confirmed in 
office as anointed Covering Cherub. 

It was simply and only because he denied forgiveness to 
be either necessary or right that his removal became inev- 
itable. 

To forgive this order, now penitent, was therefore simply 
to carry out consistently the principle upon which the Su- 
preme Executive had administered the government from 
the outset of the controversy with Lucifer. It was to vin- 
dicate that principle, and place it far above all future denial. 

Indeed, he shows it to have been one leading aim of all 
earthly dispensations to reveal in historic development this 
principle of the kingdom of God. Even on Sinai, where 



THE ADVOCATE. 245 

law in all its majesty was made to appear, Jehovah pro- 
claimed himself (Ex. xxxiv. 6), " Merciful and gracious, 
long-suffering and abundant in goodness, keeping mercy for 
thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, and 
that will by no means clear the guilty." This was Jeho- 
vah's public statement of his character and principles as 
a lawgiver and executive. 

By his Spirit in the Psalms and prophets he had con- 
stantly reiterated the same idea (Psalm li. 16, 17) : 
" Thou desirest not sacrifice, else would I give it ; thou 
delightest not in burnt-offering. The sacrifices of God are a 
broken spirit ; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou 
wilt not despise." Isaiah lvii. 15 : " Thus saith the high 
and lofty One whose name is Holy, ' I dwell in the high 
and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and hum- 
ble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive 
the heart of the contrite ones.' " Ez. xviii. 27, 28 : " When 
the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness, and do- 
eth that which is right, he shall save his soul alive, because 
he considereth and turneth from all his transgressions." 

Above all, the Mediator refers to his own recorded utter- 
ances in the days of his flesh, Matt. v. 45 : " Love your 
enemies ; bless them that curse you ; do good to them that 
hate you; and pray for them that despitefully use you 
and persecute you, that ye may be the children of your 
Father which is in heaven ; for he maketh his sun to rise 
on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just 
and on the unjust." Matt, xviii. 21 : " Lord, how oft shall 
my brother sin against me, and I forgive him, till seven 
times ? .... I say not unto thee, Until seven times, but 
Until seventy times seven." Again, Luke vi. 36 : " Be ye 
merciful as your Father in heaven is merciful." 

Thus the Mediator traces through all his own earthly 
teachings this beautiful idea, and the Father sanctions it as 
his own ; and, as if to demonstrate it beyond denial as the 



246 KEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

true, essential character of God, he points to the cross, 
and to those words spoken in the midst of his dying ago- 
nies, " Father, forgive them, they know not what they do." 
Here a forgiving spirit is manifested under the highest 
climax of injury with reference to a merely possible re- 
pentance. And if the Divine nature then truly suffered 
and spoke, the demonstration is infinite that forgiveness is 
congenial to absolute perfection. 

Indeed, what else than this can account for the existence 
of the material universe ? The Mediator who built it de- 
clares that it was built, and all its dispensations conducted, 
with a view to the ultimate exercise of mercy to the unde- 
serving. It was with a view to gratifying the Divine de- 
sire to forgive the penitent, that the heavens were spread 
abroad and the earth founded. 

Was, then, the Father everlasting the subject of an 
irregular and lawless impulse ? Was that unlawful propen- 
sity so strong, that creation's frame must be contrived, and 
time's ages roll, to enable the Maker to dispense with the 
obligations of absolute right, and do evil with impunity ? 
Such must be the fact, the Mediator urges, unless it be 
granted that to forgive the penitent is in itself, apart from 
all considerations of expediency, essentially and unchange- 
ably right. 

On the other hand, what is the character of the being 
who impugns this principle ? who refuses foi^giveness as 
not needed, denies God's disposition to bestow it, nay, 
denies the right to exercise it altogether? Is he to be 
accepted as the representative of absolute justice ? Is his 
word to be taken ? Is he sincere, honest, truthful ? 

In answer to this question, the Mediator presents his 
blood. He is represented as sprinkling it before the 
throne, as purifying the heavenly place with it ; by which 
we understand, that he discloses for the first time the his- 
tory of his sufferings, and traces them home to Lucifer as 
the real, responsible cause. 



THE ADVOCATE. 247 

From his own personal knowledge and recollection he 
lays bare the arts by which his order fell ; arts, the fatal 
power of which he learned by resisting, while seeing his 
beloved swept away. In this disclosure he proves him liar 
from the beginning, in order to be man-slayer. Then 
he traces all his own subsequent humiliation, before this 
world, when loaded with ignominy on our account, — in 
this world, when despised and rejected of men, and in 
the deepest realm of Hades. 

Particularly in his public ministry on earth, he discloses 
the history of Lucifer's temptations, both those which were 
direct, and those in which social engines were invisibly 
wielded by him as God of this world. He reveals minutely 
and infallibly how, having beset him all the way with in- 
creasing snares, at last he procured his death by false 
witness, and a mockery of justice under the forms of law. 

He shows how, in every age, the Church has been hated 
for his sake, and reveals how, out of spite to him, Lucifer 
has wielded, is wielding, and shall wield the great civil and 
ecclesiastical organizations of time, on purpose to intimidate 
or corrupt, and in every way injure his people. And all 
this while pretending on high to be the immaculate repre- 
sentative of justice ! 

Thus, by his blood, by his blood alone, he demonstrates 
the accuser both murderer and liar, destitute of the slight- 
est respect for justice or right. 

And can his denial of the principle in question then 
have any weight ? Can the opinion of a thoroughly unjust 
spirit concerning justice be entitled to the least respect? 
Can the decision of a soul immeasurably false and cruel, 
that forgiveness of penitents is wrong, possess the slightest 
conceivable title to regard ? Impossible. The reverse is 
the case. The mere fact, that a spirit so utterly fraudulent 
and deadly abhors forgiveness, is sufficient proof of its in- 
trinsic excellence. That Satan hates the very idea of 
pardon is proof positive that it is infinitely dear to God. 



248 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Thus far, the cause is gained, the argument of our 
Advocate triumphantly sustained. But this covers the 
ground only in part. Forgiveness may be right, but it 
does not follow that it is consistent or safe. And broken 
down as Lucifer is, on the mere question of abstract right, 
he may rally with desperate energy upon that of con- 
sistency. 

The espoused bride became a vile harlot, he says, it is 
impossible to place reliance on her repentance as genuine. 
It is impossible that purity once sullied can ever be 
restored. She can never be fit to be placed at the head 
of the whole family in heaven, and have the charge of 
future races. 

And if she were fit, it could not be permitted. To 
elevate beings from a career of such degradation, above 
the head of angels that never fell, must strike them with 
surprise and disgust. It must relax the bonds of law and 
order, and open the door to incalculable mischiefs. 

However right in the abstract, therefore, the pardon of 
the order is practically impossible, consistently with the 
honor of the Divine administration and the best good of 
the universe. This brings on the second position of the 
argument of our risen Advocate, namely, that the full 
pardon of this penitent order is consistent and safe. 

It is safe and consistent, evidently, so far as the opera- 
tions of the Divine mind are concerned. A thing right 
in itself can only be abused through mistake. But God is 
infallible. He is incapable of abusing a principle intrinsi- 
cally right. Therefore, no evil consequences can originate 
in the action of his mind. 

It is safe and consistent, also, so far as the normal 
action of loyal, unfallen orders is concerned. They, too, 
can only be supposed capable of abusing or perverting a 
principle right in itself, through mistake or by abnormal 
action. So long as their action is normal, and in health- 



THE ADVOCATE. 249 

ful sympathy with that of God, no evil consequences can 
arise in that quarter. 

It is only through the indirect influence of Lucifer, 
then, and minds identified with him, that the loyal orders 
of unfallen beings might be liable to innocent mistake on 
this subject, and so evil consequences be apprehended. 
It is only by not rising fully to the Divine stand-point, 
and not entering fully into healthful sympathy with the 
Infinite mind. 

But his sufferings, the Redeemer shows, have had the 
effect to elevate the loyal mind to the Divine level, and 
bring it into healthful sympathy with that of God. The 
loyal see by his example that true greatness is self-sacri- 
ficing in its nature; that the object of all rule is the 
good of those ruled, not the aggrandizement of the ruler. 
They realize that qualification to do good is the only title 
to office, and that those should rule whom God sees to be 
best adapted on the whole. 

If, then, God decides that this repentant order is best 
adapted to promote the good of all, they will not be jealous. 
Such a feeling the blood of Christ has made impossible. 

On the contrary, they will rejoice. They see that there 
is something in the return of a banished order to purity, 
place, and power, peculiarly adapted to excite joy in every 
well-regulated mind. 

To bring in a race from outside, not natives of heaven, 
might possibly, seem strange. To give supreme sway to a 
race totally corrupt by its very creation, — a race that 
never drew breath in heaven, nor knew primeval holi- 
ness, — might possibly give occasion for murmurs. 

But this order is to the manor born. It is no foreign 
importation. This order was once here. This order was 
holy like the angels themselves. This order was appointed 
to the adoptive birthright. The history of this order is 
like household words in heaven. 



250 KEDEEMEK AND KEDEEMED. 

And though in evil hour they fell, and their guilt was 
great, and for a time the tide of odium set strong against 
them, the loyal orders now see that they were less guilty 
than their betrayer and accuser. They see that the 
onset of temptation was tremendous, and, while they 
are indignant at the perfidious power that triumphed, 
they feel sympathy and compassion for the fallen, the 
defeated. 

And if they can be really purged of that stain, if they 
can be qualified to go back and carry out that interrupted 
career, there is not a loyal heart among the innumerable 
angels of light that will not leap for joy. They will say, 
" It is meet that we rejoice, for this our brother was dead, 
but is alive again ; was lost, but is found." 

Nor will such restoration logically tend to relax the 
bonds of good government or dimmish the respect for 
law in the bosoms of the loyal. If law be intrinsically 
forgiving in its very nature, as towards the penitent, then 
to forgive the penitent cannot weaken respect for law. 

Moreover, it was in this order that the principles of 
righteous rule were embodied after they had been repu- 
diated by Lucifer. For the sake of those principles the 
order was founded, and named Order of the King of 
Righteousness. What now, if this order shall be restored, 
will the universe have seen ? 

They will have seen, as soon as those principles were 
forsaken, the order banished and under forfeiture ; and 
as soon as, at infinite expense, in spite of Lucifer's intensest 
opposition, those principles were resumed by the order, 
asserted against world majorities, suffered for and sealed 
with blood, that order redeemed from forfeiture, and its 
original career continued. What does that show ? 

It shows that those principles are everything to God, 
and all else in comparison nothing. Even the dearest 
object, Christ's own brethren, his bride, without those 



THE ADVOCATE. 251 

principles must be treated like the vilest criminals, must 
die eternally. And, on the other hand, even the guiltiest 
and vilest order, sunk to the depths of Hades, once con- 
verted to those principles, and identified with them beyond 
possibility of change, can be raised to highest glory. 

Does not this show that principles are all, and persons 
nothing? Does not this assert those principles as all in 
all to God more than could be done in any other way ? 

And, in the counter development of Satanic and of 
Christ-like character, in the attack and defence of those 
principles during the process of redeeming the order, has 
not the nature, truth, and moral beauty of those principles 
been made to shine with dazzling effulgence ? 

So far, then, from relaxing the bon< of law and right- 
eous rule, and letting the universe run down, the opposite 
effect is produced. The public mind is toned up, in- 
structed, invigorated, braced beyond the possibility of 
future change. 

Moreover, the full pardon of the order is safe and con- 
sistent in so far as the order itself is concerned. 

Is it said that their degradation has been so great, that 
no confidence can be placed in their repentance ? 

The reply is, that the successive dynasties and dispensa- 
tions of earth have been so arranged as to test this matter 
thoroughly. The Church in every age has been sub- 
jected to tremendous pressure. Lucifer has in fact had 
every advantage to retain his hold ; the whole pressure 
of corrupt civil and ecclesiastical organization for ages 
has been in favor of his principles and against those 
of Christ. He has had every imaginable advantage to 
fasten those principles on the Church, by force and by 
fraud, he could possibly ask. 

To renounce them and adopt Christ's principles has 
been to be stoned, sawn asunder, torn of wild beasts, and 
made the scum and offscouring of all things. No person 



252 KEDEEMEK AND REDEEMED. 

could possibly be Christ's disciple in such a world, without 
taking up his cross and following him to execution. 

If under such circumstances his people look upon his 
blood, and are heart-broken at the sight ; if the mere 
foresight of his sacrifice, through type and symbol, had 
power for ages to melt to tears ; and if the retrospect of 
the cross increased that power, amidst fierce flames of 
persecution, — that would show to the loyal universe that 
they could put confidence in their repentance. 

If, after getting them completely under his power of 
death, Lucifer could not keep them, if at the sight of 
their slain Lord they broke out into weeping, if they 
renounced their sins, if they welcomed reproach, and loved 
not their lives unto the death, the universe might depend 
on it, their repentance was radical. 

If Satan could not keep his power, when he had it, on 
earth with every advantage, how could he ever regain that 
power after he had lost it, — in heaven where he had no 
advantage at all, but was himself the object of intense 
scorn, and abhorrence of all holy minds ? 

It is her deadly enemy that says her repentance is not 
genuine. It is a mind radically and eternally corrupt and 
reprobate, that says the stain of her defilement will never 
wash out. But it is her husband who says, it is that just 
One in whom is no guile who has chiefest reason to be 
offended with her, who has amplest opportunity to read 
her heart, it is he, the Lord of life, who presents her a 
glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such 
thing, and avows that he reposes unlimited confidence in 
her honor forever. 

Nor is she disqualified by what has passed for the 
station she was to have filled. 

On the contrary, her qualifications are enhanced. Her 
powers and faculties are restored to health and balance, 
and are stronger for the exercise they have had. The 



THE ADVOCATE. 253 

whole tendency of earthly life has been to exercise and 
strengthen them. In the family, the school, the state, 
and the church, the order has been drilled in the main 
problems of their future business. Eternity in miniature 
has been condensed into time. 

They have a profound knowledge of what misgovern- 
ment is, for they have been for ages the victims of it in 
every conceivable form. There is not an evil from the 
abuse of power they have not smarted under. 

By a terrible education, they know by contrast what 
righteous rule is. They have learned what the principles 
of the Divine character and administration are from living 
in a world where they were systematically hid, carica- 
tured, denied, — a world where Satan put his character, 
in church and state, in place of the character of God, 
and sat in the temple of God, showing himself that he 
is God. 

He who has lived in arctic winter knows how to enjoy 
the milder seasons of a temperate clime. And they who 
have lived for ages in a world of polar ice will know how 
to appreciate the unchanging tropics of the skies. 

But, above all, they are specially qualified to reign, 
because they are humble. Other things being equal, he is 
most fit to reign who most resembles God in meekness 
and lowliness of heart. The experience of the penitent 
order has developed these qualifications in a surpassing 
degree. 

They were humble and self-denying before they fell ; 
they are unspeakably more so now. Other celestial orders 
are meek and self-sacrificing, but incomparably less so 
than this. Their deep experience of the evil of sin — its 
power, its guilt, its woe, the difficulty of its cure, the infi- 
nite price by which that cure was effected — works in 
them a lowliness and self-sacrifice no other beings in the 
universe can equal. 



254 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

They are forever one with the Father and with the 
Son, in meekness and lowliness of heart, and therefore 
qualified to reign forever. 

That forgiveness, then, which is right in the abstract, is 
also consistent and safe, so far as the order itself, the loyal 
universe, and the Divine mind are concerned. 

There can be no objection, except on the part of the 
disloyal. The full restoration of the order can dissatisfy- 
only those who have been her most implacable, most 
treacherous foes, because they were the foes of her Head 
and Husband, and the foes of God and all good gov- 
ernment. 

They have hated Christ's bride because they hated him. 
They have exhausted the capabilities of deceit and mean- 
ness and cruelty, to crush her because she was his, and in 
her his principles were embodied. 

Her rescue from their deadly power will indeed be their 
death, crushing the head of their serpent conspiracy for- 
ever; but that remediless destruction is the deliverance of 
the universe. 

If there were any reasonable scruples which a loyal 
subject might entertain to the granting of the Mediator's 
claim, those scruples might well be waived in considera- 
tion of his word pledged on her behalf. But there are no 
scruples. The Advocate in his whole argument, and the 
Father before whom he pleads, are one. 

Every syllable of the Advocate's plea is but the echo of 
the Judge's thought. The loyal universe are one with 
both the Father and the Son. 

That, therefore, which is both right and consistent, all 
things considered, he asserts to be what is due to him and 
to his cause. To refuse it would be to reward Satan and 
punish him, which is impossible. He demands it as a 
reward of merit, fairly earned by his sufferings and by 
his argument, — a reward against which no voice can be 



THE ADVOCATE 255 

lifted save that voice that ought to be hushed in the 
silence of everlasting reprobation. 

To the believer this subject is peculiarly precious. It 
is calculated to draw the mind away from the discourage- 
ments of this world, and fix it on something most exhila- 
rating. We often think too much of ourselves, of our sin, 
of our difficulties. Our minds grow morbid. We faint, 
we disbelieve, we despair. Now the Bible says, " If any 
man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father." The 
practical remedy for our sins, our darkness, our despond- 
ency, is to think of our Advocate. He was raised for our 
justification. If we desire to feel our justification, we 
must think of him as our Advocate. It is a great theme. 
It will bear and repay much meditation. His career as 
Advocate was wonderful in its beginning, — it will be won- 
derful to the end ; for he ever liveth to make intercession. 
He is able to save to the uttermost. Take his advocacy 
where we will, it is a glorious, soul-reviving theme. 

How sublime that moment when Almighty power raised 
him from the deepest abyss of Hades, and set him at God's 
own right hand ! How transcendent the contrast between 
the preceding humiliation and the exaltation consequent 
thereon, — an exaltation more than repaying the degrada- 
tion, as indicated by the unique word virepv-tycoae, " Him 
hath God super-exalted." So buoyant was the illustrious 
pageant of the returning conqueror, that it overshot its pri- 
meval measure with swift-rushing momentum of majesty. 
Infinite, indeed, the condescension, but more than infinite 
the exaltation. 

The return of Jesus is the key-note of the everlasting 



" Loose all your bars of massy light, 
And wide unfold the ethereal scene ; 
He claims these mansions as his right : 
Eeceive the King of glory in ! " 



256 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Now the deep-hidden plan of the banished order's rein- 
statement is to be first publicly disclosed, filling all heaven 
with amazement, and making known to principalities and 
powers the manifold wisdom of God. 

Something the angels had conjectured of peace on 
earth, good-will to men ; but this transcends all their 
thoughts. To the disloyal the conception is as a gathering 
thunder-cloud, frowning and portentous. How they had 
gloried over the exiled order, covered with ignominy; 
how they had maligned the Son of God, and pursued him 
from one stage of humiliation to another, with vindictive 
hate and short-lived exultation ; how they had triumphed 
to see him reach the lowest stage of shame in Hades, 
where the banished order lay beneath piled mountains of 
disgrace ! 

Now suddenly there is a return. For the first time 
since the order's expulsion, there is an arrival in the courts 
of heaven from the invisible realm of exile. A sensation, 
deep and undefinable, of some impending development fill3 
all heavenly places. 

There stands the Crucified, the marks of Calvary fresh 
on hand and foot and side. But before he will put on his 
royal robes, before diadems many are allowed to replace 
the thorns upon his brow, he must first determine rights 
and titles for her he holds dearer than himself. 

Her justification must be secured before he will accept 
his own. " It is my will," he says, " that where I am 
my bride shall be." He opens the mighty argument : — 

" If I am to have any glory, if that glory is to possess 
any charm to me, she must share it with me. Without 
her I am resolved not to reign, not to enjoy blessedness. 
None can honor me who cannot honor her, whom I honor 
with implicit trust. 

" Whom I pardon, no friend of mine can wound by sign 
of accusation. In a little wrath I hid my face from her 



THE ADVOCATE. 257 

for a moment, but with everlasting kindness have I had 
mercy upon her. If she is to be discrowned, I abdicate. 
If she is to lie under ban, her stigma must be mine. 
To what station am I summoned by suffrages univer- 
sal, both finite and infinite ? To that station by those 
same suffrages must she be summoned also. Her re- 
pudiation is my defeat ; in her justification only can I be 
justified." 

And the answer to this appeal goes forth in the procla- 
mation, " Let all the angels of God worship him." That 
is the justifying answer of the Father, echoed with loud 
acclaim by innumerable companies of angels prostrate at 
his feet. In that sentence he is seen of angels justified 
in and upon our justification, for which he is risen ; and so 
accepting it, he goes up through all the heavens, through 
rank after rank, past throne after throne, far, far above all 
principality and might, — goes as our representative and 
head, our forerunner to the throne. What is done to him 
is done virtually to his order, his bride. " For whom he 
did foreknow, them he also did predestinate to be con- 
formed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first- 
born among many brethren ; and whom he did predes- 
tinate, them he also called, and whom he called, them 
he also justified, and whom he justified, them he also 
glorified." 

War-worn Christian, how ravishing the contemplation ! 
Look away from the sin to the sacrifice ! Look away from 
the fight to the victory ! Drink new life, certainty, cour- 
age, and joy from the vision. Gaze till the spirit, faint from 
excess of light, and the feeble frame, seem about to fall 
as dead before the feet of Him that shows you such things. 
Yet fall not, but pray to be strengthened with all might 
in the inner man, that you may endure the glory. Pray 
without ceasing that he would lay his hand upon you, and 
say, Be strong ; that he would grant you to be filled with 

Q 



258 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the spirit of revelation, that you may be able to compre- 
hend the breadth and length and depth and height, and 
know the love of Christ that passe th knowledge, being 
filled with all the fulness of God. 



CHAPTER XX. 

DIVINE SORROW. 
" My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." — Matt. xxvi. 38. 

IT may be doubted whether an absolute happiness be 
possible, and whether the nature of mind does not ren- 
der some contrasts of emotion inevitable. 

If we are to have concord of musical sounds, we cannot 
avoid the possibility of discord. So that the possibility of 
the harshest dissonance is implied in the very existence of 
harmony. Nay, more, it is found that discords introduced 
according to certain laws, not only do not injure the effect, 
but are indispensable to its highest perfection. And a 
composer who should be compelled to construct his com- 
position wholly of perfect chords would abandon his profes- 
sion in despair. 

So, in the execution of Nature's mighty landscape, we 
find a similar principle of contrasts. In order to have 
lights there must be shadows. The whole picture cannot 
be made with bright lights. The brighter you wish the 
light to be on some points, the darker the shade must be 
in others. If the sun makes the peak of the precipice and 
its shattered pinnacles glow like fire, it makes the deep 
gorge and glen below seem black as night. Nor are Na- 
ture's objects all painted of one bright color, nor even of 
bright colors alone. There is an endless variety of colors ; 
some bright and dazzling, some dark and sombre, others 
of a neutral tint, and that of every possible shade. And 
any eye that will study Nature's pictures will find that she 
loves sad and gloomy colors just as much as bright and 
joyous ones. 



260 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Moreover, the forms in nature show the same principle 
of contrast. If there is symmetry in nature, there is also 
deformity. If there is the line of beauty, there are lines 
of uncouthness. And there are in nature as liberal stores 
of the grotesque, the deformed, and the repulsive, as of the 
beautiful. Wherever we turn our attention, in whatever 
department of matter or of mind, this principle of contrasts 
meets us as a necessary law of all being. 

Now happiness is that light in the mental landscape of 
which sorrow is the shadow. Bliss is that concord in the 
moral symphony of which sadness is the discord. And 
no sooner could landscapes have light without shade, music 
concord without discord, than mind experience joy with- 
out possible regret. 

In the highest enjoyment there seems to be an element 
of pain as the condition of its being. Enjoyment is the 
gratification of a desire, and its intensity is in proportion 
to the fervor of the craving. If the desire be cloyed or 
stupefied or dead, the gratification of it can afford no 
pleasure. The full soul loatheth an honeycomb. The 
very acme of delight is that moment when desire is most 
intense and thrilling, and when, if it did not obtain its 
object, it would writhe in disappointment and anguish. 

Every desire is a wish. Every wish is a want. Every 
want contains in itself an element of pain. It is the felt 
absence of a good. If this pain be kept within certain 
limits it enhances pleasure, like the discords in music, like 
contrasts and shadows in painting. To the hungry soul 
every bitter thing is sweet. Hunger is the best sauce ; real 
fatigue the best soporific. In summer we take kindly to 
icebergs ; in winter we are on good terms with volcanoes. 

What we call happiness seems nothing but an exquisite 
balance between pleasure and pain. The line must be 
drawn very fine, or the equilibrium is lost. It is not well 
to sit too near the fire, nor too far off. Comfortable 



DIVINE SORROW. 261 

warmth lies in the exact middle between freezing and 
burning. The best cheer lies midway between satiety 
and starvation. Neither extreme fatigue nor indolent 
sluggishness is commendable. The true line of health- 
ful, contented industry runs about midway between idle- 
ness and bondage. 

And if the sufferings of mankind could be analyzed 
carefully, the greater part would be found to lie in the 
disturbance of the equilibrium between want and supply, 
desire and gratification. One class of mankind are miser- 
able because the line is drawn too far on the side of desire. 
They want everything, their desires are intense and vivid, 
but they have nothing. Another class of mankind are 
miserable because the line is drawn too far on the side 
of satiety. They have everything, in such profusion that 
desire is cloyed, sated, jaded, and they really want nothing. 
They are miserable because they cannot feel a real healthy 
desire for what they have. 

This principle of equilibrium between opposing prin- 
ciples seems to pervade nature. Two forces drive the 
worlds in their orbits. One impels them to, the other 
from, the sun. So long as these are exquisitely balanced, 
the obsequious world wheels contentedly round and round 
her annual path. Thus with minds, so long as the force 
of want, which is painful, is balanced by the force of 
supply, which is pleasurable, so long the contented soul 
revolves in its appointed orbit of existence. 

Therefore, of the happiest mind it may be said, with 
philosophic accuracy, it is happy because it can feel the 
uneasiness of strong desire, and knows how to let pain lift 
the latch to pleasure, and the very pangs of desire resolve 
into the thrills of ecstasy. 

These principles would seem applicable to all mind as 
mind. Difference of grade can hardly infer diversity of 
principle. Or if an exception were to be sought, it would 



262 EEDEEMEK AND REDEEMED. 

hardly be in the ascending, but in the descending series. 
The higher the grade of mind, the more perfect the sus- 
ceptibilities, the more, not less, these principles must hold 
good. Even — with reverence be it spoken — when we 
contemplate the laws of the Divine mind, we can discover 
no reason for a reversal of this principle. 

If there were in His eternal bosom no element of want 
or desire, no craving, — if He were an infinite, stagnant 
ocean, without tide or wave or ripple, — then where would 
be the possibility of joy ? Joy would be impossible, simply 
because desire was impossible. The Divine blessedness, 
then, rests not on the impossibility of a Divine sorrow, but 
on its possibility. It is because God is a being of true and 
genuine emotions, of delicate susceptibilities to good and 
evil, pleasure and pain, that he can be divinely blessed. 
And if we reflect patiently on this subject, we shall see 
that these principles not only apply to the Divine Being, 
but that they apply in an ascending ratio, — in proportion 
to his exaltation. 

Does the infinite perfection of his attributes exempt him 
from the liability to suffering ? This is the same as to ask 
whether the more delicate a mind becomes the less sensi- 
tr^e it grows, — whether the more perfect its faculties the 
less impressible. Or whether, in proportion to the refine- 
ment, scope, elevation, and intensity of emotion of a mind 
is its insensibility. What would be thought of the philos- 
opher who should affirm that the perfection of a thermom- 
eter consisted in sensitiveness to heat, but not to cold ? or 
of a barometer, in sensitiveness to atmospheric dryness, and 
not moisture ? "What of a physiologist who should say that 
the perfection of a living body would be sensitiveness to all 
pleasurable sensations and functions, but not to their oppo- 
sites ? Yet such would not be more incongruous concep- 
tions than that the perfection of a mind should consist in 
sensitiveness to sood, but not to evil. 



DIVINE SORROW. 263 

On the other hand, observation shows us that as minds 
ascend in the scale of possible enjoyment they ascend 
equally in that of possible suffering. If you seek for 
creatures least susceptible of pain, you do not go up among 
the angels, but down among the oysters. It is the polypus 
and the mollusk that are nearest to exemption from pain ; 
but they have no eye, ear, smell, sense, nor organs, unless 
it be a mouth, and faint touch and taste. 

Ascend from the zoophytes. Add organ after organ. 
The eye adds as wide a field of susceptibility to suffering 
as to good. The ear the same. The smell the same. 
Delicate organs of touch and of locomotion the same. And 
when you reach such races as the dog, the elephant, the 
horse, you certainly reach those where the susceptibility to 
suffering is as widely enhanced as that of enjoyment. 
Add, then, the faculties peculiar to man, and does not the 
same law hold good ? If the lowest and most degraded 
human beings can enjoy more than the highest of the lower 
species, can they not suffer more ? 

Is not that very reason that is most divine in us, that 
conscious selfhood, that conscious accountability to eternal 
truth and right, that lofty yearning after ideal good which 
is in man the very signature of his godlike origin, — are 
they not the very attributes that enable us to suffer as no 
species of a lower grade can ? Is there not a quality to 
the sorrow of a human being in its various vicissitudes of 
sorrow, — in the very fact that it can reflect on its sorrow, 
remember, compare, judge, foresee, and exercise all the 
functions of conscious reason, — that makes that sorrow 
more poignant ? 

And among men, does not the principle still further de- 
velop itself? Who is most acutely sensitive to false har- 
mony ? Evidently he who is most delicately sensitive to 
the delight of true concord. Who feels most bitterly the 
pain of bereavement? He who experiences the tenderest 



264 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

delight in social relationships. Who writhe most ago- 
nizingly under the stings of conscience ? Those who are 
most alive to the claims of virtue and holiness. Who are 
most oppressed with the woes and wants of their fellow- 
men ? Those who are most tenderly gratified with the 
sight of common prosperity and happiness. Thus the 
higher the tone and calibre of a mind, and the greater its 
susceptibility to intense enjoyment, the keener its liability 
to the reverse. 

Now if this be the general principle upward to man, and 
through all the grades of human development, how must 
it be when we ascend still higher? If we find angelic 
races with still more exalted susceptibilities and wider 
scope of being, with capacities for enjoyment far beyond 
ours, must there not be a corresponding increase in their 
susceptibility to suffering ? 

They will see more clearly what is beautiful and what is 
ugly, what is good and what is evil, what is benevolent 
and what is selfish. All contrasts of moral qualities will 
affect them more vividly. Their attachments must be more 
intense, and their disappointments, if they have any, more 
deep. And the higher w r e ascend, the wider the scope of 
powers, and the more exalted their refinement, the greater 
will be the possibility of experiencing suffering. 

At the last, then, at the highest stage of being, must the 
entire argument be reversed ? When we reach the highest 
grade of mind, the widest scope of faculties, the greatest 
strength and depth and intensity of emotion, the most 
subtle refinement of susceptibility, shall we suddenly dis- 
cover that there is an infinite increase of capacity for 
pleasure and an infinite decrease or cessation of suscepti- 
bility to pain ? 

Far otherwise ! In the infinite capacities of the Divine 
Being we find the highest possible scope for contrasts of 
emotion. And if the Divine blessedness be a reality too 



DIVINE SORROW. 265 

august, too ecstatic for us to conceive, it is so for this 
reason, namely, that the mind which feels it is susceptible 
to every variation, every possible tone and hue of feeling 
throughout the mighty diapason of emotion. 

If now from nature we turn to revelation, what light 
does that throw on the question ? Does it not confirm the 
general train of thought? The main elements of the 
Divine blessedness,,, as revealed in Scripture, are, — the 
conscious enjoyment of such attributes as eternal and 
independent being, omnipresence, infinite power and 
knoAvledge, conscious moral strength and rectitude, the 
communion of the Trinity, and the filial affection of the 
majority of His offspring, together with his foreknowledge 
and anticipation of a redeemed and reorganized universe. 
These constitute the Scriptural elements of the Divine 
blessedness ; and it is indeed a glorious theme. 

But the question is, whether the Bible breathes the im- 
plication that this blessedness is absolute, — without con- 
trast or admixture of any elements of regret or pain or 
suffering of any kind? 

On this point we find that from all pain or suffering or 
regret inconsistent with his own attributes, as above con- 
sidered, God is free, and must be forever. He has no such 
sorrow or suffering as results from weakness or ignorance 
or mistake or moral obliquity or imperfection of any kind 
in himself. No sorrow which would impeach his charac- 
ter, or essentially dim his glory, or abase that which is his 
true majesty. But, aside from this, and with the subject 
thus carefully guarded, we find that the Scriptures freely 
use language implying some kind of painful emotion. 

Thus in respect to sin, in all its forms, God is repre- 
sented as expressing the most decided feelings of opposi- 
tion and dislike. To a perfectly truthful nature, the mere 
contact with fraud and guile must be repulsive. To 
Infinite meekness, pride must seem loathsome. To infi- 



266 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

nite love, selfishness must appear odious. Under a per- 
fectly wise, just, and kind moral government, an act of 
insubordination must appear to God peculiarly unreason- 
able and wrong. Therefore he says, " Pride, arrogancy, 
and a fro ward mouth do I hate." Therefore he is said to 
be offended. His wrath is revealed. His anger burns 
like fire. And when sin extends, and rebellion organizes 
itself from age to age, he endures with much long-suffer- 
ing vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. And men^ 
therefore, are said to treasure up wrath against the day of 
wrath. 

Are these feelings, then, of the Divine breast agreeable 
feelings? Is God pleased with sin in itself? Is the sight 
of it pleasant to him ? What do we mean by saying he is 
displeased with it? — that it is unpleasant to him? Is 
there not a contrast here ? God is pleased with holiness, 
displeased with sin. Holiness is pleasant to him ; sin, un- 
pleasant. Are both states of mind the same, and equally 
agreeable ? Into what abyss of contradictions does the de- 
nial of the Divine capability of suffering plunge us ! The 
Lord is as well pleased when he is displeased as when he 
is not. To what irreverence does it logically impel us ! 
To the Infinite purity sin is as pleasing as holiness. How 
can we maintain the holiness of God unless we admit a 
contrast in point of agreeableness of feeling in witnessing 
holiness and sin ? If he is indifferent, or feels just as agree- 
ably at sight of sin as of holiness, how can we conceive him 
to be holy ? Is it not the essential nature of holiness to be 
painfully affected by the very existence of sin ? 

But there is another consideration that comes in here. 
Not only is a pure mind painfully affected by that which is 
impure in itself, but it is especially so when the impurity 
is seen in a beloved object. To witness the gradual corrup- 
tion and final downfall of a dear child or relative or friend 
is especially painful to an affectionate heart. Can parents 



DIVINE SORROW. 267 

see their children become intemperate or vicious without 
peculiar sorrow ? If sin be in itself painful to a virtuous 
mind, is it not additionally so when seen in a beloved 
object ? 

Does not God speak as if it were so with him ? Does 
he not seem to feel the rebellion of his children against 
him ? And when, as a moral Governor, he is called to 
pass sentence of death on them, does he not speak as if it 
occasioned painful emotions ? Have I any pleasure in the 
death of the wicked ? As I live, saith the Lord, I have 
no pleasure at all in the death of him that dieth ! 

What is the meaning of such language ? Does it not 
seem to express real sorrow, real grief, real pain ? Must 
we deprive the language of all meaning ? Must we force 
upon these words, contrary to then nature, the signification 
of absolute joy ? Does not such a course repeal the laws of 
language, confuse all distinctions of right and wrong, and 
plunge the mind into inextricable confusion ? 

But the fullest and most convincing argument on this 
matter lies in the person of Christ. There are those who 
take Christ as a mere man, divinely inspired, indeed, but 
not an incarnation of Deity. Yet even on this ground, 
low and imperfect as we deem it, there is room for a pow- 
erful appeal. For, even on this hypothesis, Christ was a 
man whom God peculiarly sanctioned and set apart for the 
special purpose of showing forth the Divine character. So 
that in him we see God, at least by a true moral resem- 
blance. So that, at least, by a close spiritual likeness, in 
him dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and he is to 
us the brightness of his glory and the express image of his 
person. 

But if so, what an affecting idea does this present of that 
God who selected this man of sorrows as his most expressive 
representative ? Does Jesus, viewed as a mere man, filled 
with pity, bearing all our sins and sorrows and diseases, and 



268 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

heart-broken at the ingratitude of his subjects, — does he 
convey the idea of a God that is incapable of a feeling of 
disquiet ? — whose heart has never known, and never can 
know, the most superficial ripple of regret for all the sins 
and sorrows and distresses of Ins children ? On the con- 
trary, is not the idea of God which Jesus illustrates, taking 
him as a mere man, just the opposite of this ; does he not 
illustrate to us a Divine Father who can and does feel most 
acutely both the ingratitude of his children and their deep 
degradation ? 

Even this view of Jesus, imperfect as it is, has enough in 
it, one would think, to melt the heart and bring it in peni- 
tence to a Father's feet. How much more when we take 
the higher, and, as I believe, the only Scriptural view, that 
Jesus, though a perfect man, was God become man. 

Was it indeed the Word that was with God and was God 
that became flesh and dwelt among us, and experienced all 
fleshly vicissitudes painful as well as others ? Was it the 
Lord who spread the heavens and founded the earth, who 
humbled himself to be born of a virgin, and was there in 
that humiliation no reality, and in the being who under- 
went it no capacity for sorrow or suffering ? Was it indeed 
the Lord who had glory with the Father before the world 
began, who stood in servile form on earth, and toiled and 
taught, hungered and thirsted, prayed and wept? Was it 
indeed Jehovah, Israel's only Redeemer and King, who 
visited them as David's son only to be insulted, smitten, 
spit upon, and crucified? And was it Jehovah who, 
through those pale and patient lips, could say, " My soul 
is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." If it was, then 
methinks the question is settled for all eternity whether the 
Divine Being can experience sorrow and suffering and pain, 
or not. 

As we stand in the shadow of that cross, amid rending 
rocks and yawning graves, under the darkness of a sky 



DIVINE SORROW. 269 

of sackcloth ; as we see those trickling drops of blood 
Divine ; as we hear that prayer, that last, loud, bitter cry ; 
as we gaze upon the victim, dead at last, — methinks the 
mighty lesson designed to be taught us, as with infinite 
appeal, is the lesson of a sorrow not human merely, but 
Divine, a grief not of any mere finite sufferer, but of an 
infinite ; an anguish and a woe not of a mere created vic- 
tim, but of an uncreated Ransom, whose expiation, like his 
suffering, might be infinite. 

The entire plan of redemption, from the laying the 
foundation of the world to the last shout of redeemed 
myriads about the Redeemer's throne, is a plan springing 
out from, and illustrative of, the Divine sorrow. 

Not, indeed, that the Divine blessedness was thereby 
annihilated or obliterated. But it was a blessedness 
mixed with endurance, a cup of felicity mingled with drops 
of bitterness. It was a blessedness largely of anticipation, 
and qualified by present sorrow. It was for the joy set 
before him that he endured the cross despising the shame. 
It was in the anticipation of a redeemed and regenerated 
universe, that the Divine mind sustained itself in the pos- 
session of a conscious blessedness through an age-long 
night of storm, and darkness, and self-denial, and suffer- 
ing. 

In taking leave of the discussion, we observe that it is a 
point of great importance to know what God men are 
worshipping. This was the great question anciently, — 
Jehovah or Baal, — the living God or idols ? It is so now. 
For though no outward shrine be raised, though there 
be no image, though the name of God be retained, yet 
it is as easy to fashion an idol out of ideas as ever it was 
of wood or stone. It is easy to conceive of a false char- 
acter and false attributes, and dress up in the thoughts a 
being that shall be no more like the reality of God than 
Moloch. And therefore, even among professing Christians, 



270 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the great question is, what God are you worshipping, — 
the true God as he is, as he reveals himself in Christ, in 
his word, in nature, and in the soul, or some monstrous 
philosophical idol enthroned in his place ? 

For if they call on us to worship any such deity, — a 
being heartless and unsympathetic, a being as opposite to 
Christ as arctic winter to tropical spring, — and if they 
invoke all the tremendous sanctions of endless retribution 
to enforce such worship, it is our duty to refuse the 
blasphemous idolatry. We will not bow the knee. This 
God, we reply, — when any such portrait is drawn before 
us, — is not our God. Ours is a God of infinite tender- 
ness and sympathy, and the best idea of his susceptibility 
of heart is revealed in Jesus. Any other is a false God, 
a philosophical idol, — we will not bow down to it nor 
serve it. 

This view of the character of God, once more, is 
adapted to soften the heart and bring men to repentance. 
As long as it is possible to persuade men that their father 
is indifferent, unfeeling, and that all their evil conduct 
does not trouble him, or diminish his happiness in the least, 
so long men will grow colder and harder, and more des- 
perate in alienation. Nothing will so soon melt the heart 
of man, as to see that God is and always has been patient, 
much enduring, long suffering, and that in Christ the story 
of his feelings is all told. 

This, reader, is the God you have sinned against. When 
I summon you to repent of sin, this is what I mean by sin, 
namely, your treatment of such a Being as this. When I 
speak to you of confession, of forgiveness, this is the Being 
in whose ear you are to say, "Father, I have sinned," and 
whose lips must answer, " Thy sins be forgiven thee." 
You may refuse to repent and seek forgiveness, but all 
eternity cannot make your conduct either right, honorable, 
or blest. He is good, patient, and magnanimous. " His 



DIVINE SORROW. 271 

work is honorable." His complaint against you is not 
imaginary nor trivial. You have truly wounded him. He 
is both grieved and indignant. You must confess your sin. 
You must ask forgiveness. If not, that feeling of displeas- 
ure will abide on you forever. But if you do, if you say, 
" Father, I have sinned against heaven and before thee," 
he will not only pardon, but call on angels to rejoice, say- 
ing, " It is meet that we should make merry, for this my 
son was dead, but is alive again, was lost, but is found." 



CHAPTER XXI. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 



" Of resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment." — 
Heb. vi. 2. 

THE principles of the doctrine of Christ are those 
simple truths that lie at the foundation of religion, <— 
alphabet truths, elementary to higher knowledge, always 
taken for granted both in the Divine treatment of man- 
kind and in the Bible. 

Repentance is a first principle, since the whole treat- 
ment of the race by Providence is as if it were a revolted 
race, and the Bible always so speaks of it. Faith is a 
first principle, all God's conduct, as well as his language, 
proclaiming him the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and 
gracious, slow to anger and abundant in goodness, forgiving 
iniquity, transgression, and sin. Baptism and the laying on 
of hands are elementary to the social well-being of believ- 
ers, during Christ's absence in heaven. They need to be 
associated, edified, taught, governed. The resurrection 
and eternal judgment consistently close the list of ele- 
mentary truths. It is the obvious winding up of all, that 
believers should be glorified and crowned in immortality, 
while unbelievers should be judged according to their deeds. 

All these elements are simple, plain, and vitally united 
as parts of one living body of truth. They must live or 
die together. If repentance be denied, eternal judg- 
ment falls as a matter of course ; and, vice versa, if the 
resurrection and eternal judgment be undermined, repent- 
ance and faith will not long survive. If repentance, faith, 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 273 

resurrection, and eternal judgment are lost, baptism and 
the laying on of hands are lost also, or if the latter are 
rejected, the former will not long be retained with any life 
and power. 

Against one of these elementary truths, however,— 
eternal judgment, — a wide-spread reaction exists, not 
only among the immoral and profane, but among many 
of moral lives and apparent piety. The denial of eternal 
punishment, in one form or another, is doubtless the great 
characteristic of the age, and the animating principle of 
the assault upon the authenticity and inspiration of the 
Bible. That onset, the most formidable ever known, 
arises in great measure from the difficulty of detaching 
the idea of everlasting punishment from Christianity. 

Now, that the disloyal should be opposed to the execu- 
tion of the penalties of treason is not strange ; but that 
the loyal should sympathize with them is remarkable, and 
indicates the presence of error and misconception. If a 
man does not sympathize with his government in the 
execution of just penalty upon traitors, it evinces that he 
himself is either disloyal or deceived. And as it is difficult 
to argue against prejudice, caused by latent misconception, 
it becomes necessary first to define the doctrine and clear 
it of misrepresentations, and then to prove it. Concisely, 
then, I observe, the doctrine of eternal judgment is not 

1. That a part of mankind were created on purpose to 
sin and suffer forever. 

" The chief end of man," we are taught, " is to glorify 
God and enjoy him forever." And if that be the chief 
end of man, it is the chief end of man's Creator in creat- 
ing him. The chief end of God in creating man, and 
all his creatures, was, that they should glorify and enjoy 
him forever. If any fail of the true purpose of their 
being, it is a departure from the original end and aim of 
God in their being. 

12* E 



274 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

It would be just as reasonable to say that the ship- 
wright created the ship that dashes upon the rocks and is 
wrecked for that express purpose, as to say that God 
created souls that rebel and are lost for that purpose. 
What ! a government create creatures expressly to rebel ? 
Is it, indeed, the highest conception we can form of a wise 
moral government, that it should initiate, develop, and 
ripen a rebellion against itself? 

2. The doctrine is not that the sufferings of the lost are 
in themselves an element of happiness to the righteous, 
and necessary to enhance their bliss by contrast. 

True, when great Babylon falls we hear a voice from on 
high exclaiming, " Rejoice over her, thou heaven ; . . . . and 
again they said Allelulia, and her smoke rose up forever." 
But this only represents in a vivid manner the rejoicing of 
benevolent minds over the downfall of a despotism of ages. 

So, all patriots in this land would rejoice were Richmond 
taken, Charleston swept off from the face of the earth, and 
the smoke of an atrocious rebellion ascending forever to the 
eye of back-looking generations of the Republic. Yet it 
would not be in the personal sufferings of the defeated 
conspirators we should rejoice, but in the deliverance of 
the country and the world from a tyranny so thoroughly 
diabolic. 

All heaven and all holy beings will rejoice, not in the 
personal sufferings of the Devil and his angels and lost 
men, but that a gigantic rebellion has failed, and failed for- 
ever, the majesty of the Divine government been vindi- 
cated the interests of the loyal universe eternally secured. 

3. The doctrine is not that there is a literal place of 
physical torment by material fire. 

Such a conception belongs to a superstitious age and an 
unreasonable religion. An irrational system needs a brutal 
conception of punishment to intimidate reason and overawe 
investigation. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 275 

Those ages of the Church in which sensuous images have 
been most prominent have not been the purest, but the 
reverse. Nowhere do we find the literal sense of the 
emblems so insisted on, and the imagination of Christen- 
dom so saturated therewith, as in those ages when holiness 
was most nearly extinct, and the corruptions of the Church 
at their height. The insufficiency of gross material con- 
ceptions on this subject to purity or restrain is also demon- 
strated in various heathen systems, — such as Boodhism 
and Brahminism, which even rival Rome in the vividness 
of their descriptions of physical suffering hereafter. 

Such exhibitions, no doubt, may have exerted some 
restraint in a rude and barbarous age. But they un- 
doubtedly contributed to perpetuate the rudeness and the 
barbarism to which they were naturally allied. 

The true law by which the vivid imagery of Scripture 
on this subject is to be interpreted is, the law of analogy, 
a law the opposite of fanciful, and as rigidly scientific as the 
law of geometric proportion. 

Pride, ambition, deceit, hatred, selfishness, are, in their 
own nature, like fire to the soul inflamed by them ; and as 
they have no tendency to self-recovery, so they are, if not 
Divinely quenched, an eternal fire. Moreover, the sense 
of blame, from exposure to the just displeasure of God and 
holy beings, affects the mind like fire. Men shrink from 
it as they do from flame ; they seek to cover themselves 
from it by fig-leaf excuses, by self-justification, as instinc- 
tively as they cover the naked body from the scorching 
tropical sun. 

What the emblems of the Bible really mean, then, is, 
that a time will come when the rebellion shall be entirely 
defeated, all its designs frustrated, and its real history, 
principles, and character disclosed, and the righteous judg- 
ment of God in respect to it fully and finally revealed. 

If the rebellion in this land, for example, chooses to 



276 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

identify itself with pride, fraud, and cruelty, and if our 
government, in any good degree, chooses to identify itself 
with humility, honesty, and universal benevolence, then 
the failure of rebellion, and total defeat of its desperate 
machinations and exposure to the universal abhorrence of 
mankind must be, to the desperate conspirators, like fire 
unquenchable. 

And this we take to be one design of Divine providence 
in this whole national convulsion. The providence of God 
so overrules it as to give a striking illustration on a temporal 
stage of the principles of eternal judgment as they will be 
applied in the suppression of the revolt against God's throne. 

And if we would understand the doctrine ; if we would 
be in a right position to estimate the evidence bearing upon 
it, and to resist the sweep of disloyal sympathies setting 
through the community against it, we must be sure that our 
minds are purged of those gross and sensuous conceptions, 
by which as much as by any other one means the great re- 
bellion has manufactured a sympathetic public sentiment 
against God, and in its own favor. 

4. The doctrine is not that those who would gladly submit, 
if they might, will be endlessly punished for a single sin, or 
for the sins of a brief existence. 

The Bible gives no authority for supposing a time will 
ever come when, if all in rebellion against God should sub- 
mit, they would not be pardoned. It is true, a time will 
come when all offers of mercy and all special efforts to per- 
suade them to submit will cease, but that is all. And that 
is a very different thing from supposing a time when, if they 
did submit, they would not be pardoned. The efforts cease 
because they are useless ; because they have been carried 
as far as they can be consistently. But it does not therefore 
follow that, should submission take place, it would not be 
accepted. 

Seventy years have elapsed since my honored father 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 277 

taught that " the exile from heaven " of the wicked will be 
" as voluntary as it is just," and that God " will send to 
hell none who are not by voluntary sin and rebellion unfitted 
for heaven." x Nor have these declarations ever been called 
in question, nor are they likely to be, if the following passage 
in a leading quarterly is allowed to pass without particular 
animadversion : — 

"Even in hell, if a sinner shall choose God instead of 
himself, as his object of supreme affection, .... his choice 
thenceforth will be satisfactory to God and to his own moral 
nature, and the sting of present sin will be extracted. And 
it is even more certain that the benevolence of God would 
find a way to pardon his past sin, than that any one will 
ever in a future world thus form the choice which God's 
law will there as here require." 2 

5. The doctrine is not that the capacities of the mind for 
suffering will eternally increase and expand, and omnipo- 
tence expend all its energies in filling those capacities with 
torture to the utmost. 

Views of this kind have been resorted to, no doubt, with 
a good motive, in order to rouse men to a sense of danger. 
But the conception is so fearful that many Christians have 
felt unable to bear it. And this feeling has contributed not 
a little to a reaction against the doctrine itself. 

Now, while we ought not to make the consequences of 
sin any less fearful than they certainly will be, there is no 
need of trying to make them more so. We want, on a 
subject so solemn, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth. 

On what authority, then, is it asserted that the capacities 
of the wicked will eternally increase ? It is not self-evident. 
It is not demonstrable by the light of nature. On the con- 
trary, from the observed tendencies of sin to dwarf and 

1 The Government of God desirable. "Works, Vol. II. p. 14. 

2 Bibliotheca Sacra, January, 1863, p. 184. 



278 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

degrade the powers, we might infer, aside from revelation, 
that the consciousness of the wicked would finally become 
extinct. It is only from the word of God that we learn 
the contrary. But in what part of God's word is it revealed 
that the wicked will increase in capacity forever ? Is not 
this an unauthorized statement, an invention of man ? 

And as to the idea that omnipotence will expend itself 
forever in filling that capacity with direct positive torture 
to the utmost, on what authority is so much asserted ? Is 
the doctrine of an absolute misery self-evident ? Can it be 
proved by the light of nature ? Can the mind choose with- 
out motive ? Is not choice always as the greatest ap- 
parent good ? If exile from heaven is voluntary, is it not 
an apparent good ? Is it not because, however miserable 
without, the reprobate would be more miserable within? 
Is is not because, while his character remains unchanged, 
outer darkness appears less intolerable than the light unap- 
proachable of the Divine purity? And does not pride 
refuse to yield because submission appears more painful 
than all the torments of perdition ? 

On what, then, rests the doctrine of a suffering meta- 
physically absolute ? Does the Bible unequivocally reveal 
it ? Does it not rather invalidate it by such expressions as 
" whatsoever loveth and maketh a he," and by sanctioning 
the principle that sin will be voluntary forever ? And has 
not the Church in all ages allowed this latitude of theologic 
speculation without protest or censure ? 1 

Milton, for instance, represents Lucifer as saying, 

" Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven." 

And describes his infernal palace as built 

1 It is a maxim of Catholic theology, derived from Augustine, " that the 
■will necessarily seeks good, and cannot seek evil ratione mali, but only 
ratione boni, whence all sin that ever has been committed, up to the first lapse 
from God of Satan, has been caused by the desire for apparent good." — 
Brownson's Quarterly, July, 1863, p. 294. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 279 

" with the sound 
Of dulcet symphonies and voices sweet." 

He also represents Satan, when going in quest of earth, 
as exhorting his assembled angels to 

" intend at home, 
While here shall be our home, what best may ease 
The present misery, and render hell 
More tolerable." 

Indeed, Milton is not afraid to ascribe some moral excel- 
lence to the fallen angels, — 

" For neither do the spirits damned 
Lose all their virtue." 

He represents their various efforts during Lucifer's ab- 
sence to 

" entertain 
The irksome hours " 

by games, and feats of skill, and military evolutions, or by 
music, poetry, philosophy, and even by theology, as 

" Others apart sat on a hill retired 
In thoughts more elevate, and reasoned high 
Of providence, foreknowledge, will, and fate, 
Fixed fate, free will, foreknowledge absolute, 
And found no end in wandering mazes lost." 

Yet Christendom has neither censured nor defended this, 
but simply acquiesced in it as the only view on which an 
epic could be written so as not to offend the common sense 
of mankind. Indeed, we are constrained to think it as im- 
practicable to compose a story on the theory of the strictly 
absolute misery of the principal characters, as it would be 
on the theory of their invariably choosing contrary to the 
strongest motive or the greatest apparent good. 

It is true, the emblems of the Bible with respect to 
eternal judgment are fearfully impressive. The wine 
of the wrath of God is poured out without mixture into 
the cup of his indignation. The dispensation of Divine 



280 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

silence and restraint ends. The dispensation of the reve- 
lation of his righteous judgment begins. 

But it has been well observed, " that the fearful de- 
scriptions which the Bible presents of the condition of the 
lost are such as a holy mind would give, and not such as 
the sinner himself would draw. The picture which a 
sober, virtuous, and true man would put upon the canvas, 
of a drunken, profane, and polluted wretch, would scarce- 
ly be recognized by the vile man himself. He might 
boast, even, of his bad eminence, glory in his shame, and 
account his ruin a reward." 1 

To us, indeed, the filthiness of a swine in its sty is dis- 
gusting ; to the swine it does not appear so. To an honest 
man, the rage of speculation in the country's hour of 
need seems like a fire in the soul ; to Shylock it may 
appear otherwise, as he clutches his bags of gold. The 
orgies of vice and debauchery are regarded with very 
different eyes by the virtuous and by the vicious. To the 
one they seem like a scene of torment, by the other 
they may be termed paradise. 

There are places on earth so infernal, that, in the cus- 
tomary language of society, they are called hells. Yet 
gamblers do not appear to realize that they are places to 
the eye of God full of unquenchable fire. It seems to 
be the very nature of sin to blind the mind of the sinner 
to his own unhappy state, and make him say, 

"Evil, be thou my good." 

Hence, however miserable the condition of the wicked 
in eternity will appear to them, it is certain that to God it 
must appear infinitely more so, and must be described in 
terms expressive of his view of the case rather than 
theirs. Nor does the suggestion impair the force of mo- 
tive, but the reverse ; for, in the language of the writer 

1 Bibliotheca Sacra, January, 1863, p. 188. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 281 

already quoted, " Although in a certain way it modifies the 
impression in regard to the severity of God made by the 
Bible descriptions of future and eternal punishment, it 
does not in the least abate the solemn meaning of the 
Scriptures ; for the picture which the holy mind of God, 
by his prophets and apostles, draws of the condition of the 
lost, is the true one. The sinner will not be unconscious 
of suffering, any more than the drunkard who can give 
the most graphic account of his miserable experiences is 
unconscious of suffering ; and the fact, that the sinner will 
be in a state to choose his sins, with the sufferings they 
involve, only makes his doom the more fearful to contem- 
plate." 1 

We should remember, also, that the style of the Bible on 
this subject is highly figurative and emblematic, and that 
hyperbole is one of the most familiar characteristics of 
such a style. This is the case in the language of ordinary 
life. The office of figures and emblems is to kindle the 
torpid imagination, and carry the dull mind to a higher 
pitch than it would otherwise attain. Hence the figure 
must always flash above and beyond the reality. Like 
cannon at long range, figures must be pointed too high. 

The language of every-day life is replete with hyper- 
bole. Descriptions of political revolutions are full of 
images of earthquake, tornado, and volcanic eruption. 

How often is some defeated aspirant described in terms 
which, if literal, would imply excessive torment. No one 
misunderstands this. All know that, though intensely 
chagrined and mortified by the defeat of his ambitious 
projects, he is living quietly in retirement. True, he may 
have no taste for the simple pleasures of home ; the en- 
joyment of existence is in a manner spoiled ; but he is 
still conscious of many sensations that are of a pleasurable 
description. 

1 Bibliotheca Sacra, January, 1863, p. 188. 



282 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Such being the law of figurative language in every-day 
life, we turn to the Bible and find that all portions of 
prophecy relating to Divine judgments in this world are 
constructed on this principle, and are always so regarded 
by interpreters. 

What possible hyperbole stronger, for example, than 
Isaiah employs to denote the destruction of Idumsea ? 
u Their slain shall be cast out, and their stink shall come 
up out of their carcases, and the mountains shall be 
melted with their blood." Or than is used 2 Kings xxi. 
13, to foretell the captivity of Judah ? " And I will wipe 
Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish, wiping it, and turning 
it upside down." 

Let any one open a treatise on the Apocalypse, of any 
school of interpretation, and see to what extent hyperbole 
is universally recognized in all portions relating to temporal 
things. How, then, can it be proved to be confined to 
them ? How can it be shown that, in respect to eternal 
things, prophecy is constructed upon a wholly different 
principle ? If not, if there is a probability that the principle 
is uniform throughout all prophecy, both in regard to things 
temporal and things eternal, then the foundation of the 
theory of a strictly absolute suffering would be removed. 

Men never misunderstand hyperbole in every-day life. 
They never misunderstand it in prophecies of temporal 
judgment; but there is some reason to think they have 
misunderstood it in prophecies of eternal judgment. Men 
have infused into God's language a tinge of malignity that 
does not properly belong to him. They have, as it were, 
bit and stung God's words till they are red and angry. 
They have judged God by themselves, or rather made him 
worse than themselves, for they have infused a venom into 
his language they never think of injecting into their own. 

God is a moral Governor, and his government the ideal 
of good government. All that is essentially right in earthly 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 283 

governments is but a faint reflex or copy of the Divine, and 
nothing that is plainly a vice or defect in earthly govern- 
ments can claim the sanction of a Divine example. 

Is, then, the direct torture of prisoners by earthly govern- 
ments an excellence ? History answers in the negative. It 
is the savage who puts his captive to death by slow tortures. 
It is scarcely less than savage Roman civilization that em- 
ployed a mode of execution so cruel as crucifixion. It was 
the civilization of the Dark Ages, in countries misnamed 
Christian, that legalized the rack, the wheel, the thumb- 
screw, and the boot, and made prisons frightful abodes of 
misery. More enlightened days have laid aside the torture 
and reformed the prison system. And should this govern- 
ment, in case the rebellion were suppressed, proceed to the 
torture of its chief, the spectacle would excite the abhor- 
rence of Christendom. 

Now it is the Reformation of the sixteenth century that 
has revolutionized the mind of Christendom on this subject, 
and abolished forever the practice of torture. Of course 
it is impossible to continue to view the Divine government 
as it was viewed before this change, or to use colors that 
might be freely employed by minds familiarized to the 
usages of barbarism. 

Representations of the Divine government have been 
made in former times that transcend in horror all that was 
ever practised or conceived on earth. All that savages 
ever invented at the stake, all that inquisitors ever perpe- 
trated in their gloomy adyta, all that the brutal legislation 
of a midnight world ever sanctioned, is as nothing to that 
which the Divine government has been described as prac- 
tising upon the persons of its criminals, omnipotently and 
forever. 

But that same risen Redeemer, who by his word and 
spirit and providence has rendered it impossible for us to 
allow our government to torment the worst rebel that ever 



284 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

breathed, renders it impossible to conceive of the Divine 
government, which is ours as no earthly government can 
be, doing the same. 

The Divine government will use all force necessary to 
break the power of rebellion utterly and forever, and 
will express fully its just abhorrence of the conduct of 
Satan and all identified with him, and will place the repro- 
bate under due restraint, where they can do the state no 
harm, and may yield coerced service as convicts in the 
penitentiary. But to the infliction of direct, positive, abso- 
lute torture for its own sake, the Divine government will 
not proceed. 

The just indignation of God against the ineffable atrocity 
of the rebellion will be expressed, because to express it is 
right and consistent with the highest benevolence, not for 
the sake of inflicting pain. All the inflictions of future 
retribution will be perfectly consistent with benevolence. 
They will have not the slightest tinge of malevolence. 

The Divine government will eternally conform to its 
own revealed precept, " Love your enemies." God will 
never to all eternity do anything to his enemies which is 
not, all things considered, for the best good of the universe, 
themselves included. It is no paradox to say that it is for 
the supreme good of spirits fixed in pride, fraud, and cru- 
elty, for God to abhor them, and express his abhorrence. 
It would be worse for them, continuing what they are, for 
God not to abhor them and not to manifest his abhorrence. 
And if the Divine treatment does not in fact make them 
happy, it is not because God is not willing they should be 
happy provided they would submit, but because he sees 
that they will not submit, and because they see that he 
justly abhors their conduct ; in short, it is because truth 
can never please a liar, meekness never satisfy pride, dis- 
interestedness never make selfishness happy. 

6. The doctrine is not that the race as a race will 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 285 

be finally lost, and that only a small remnant will be 
saved. 

As in Adam all die a natural death, so in Christ shall all 
be made alive with spiritual and eternal life. But in Adam 
all do not die a natural death with no exceptions. Enoch 
was an exception. The whole generation of believers living 
at the second advent will be exceptions, as Paul implies by 
saying, " We shall not all sleep," that is, we shall not all 
die. Now as there are exceptions under the first clause, 
so there are exceptions under the second. As, with some 
exceptions, all die in Adam, so with some exceptions shall 
all be made alive in Christ. 

Half the race die in infancy, and are saved, and these, 
with such adults as find the narrow road, make a majority 
in the darkest ages, even on the assumption that all adult 
heathen are lost. But is this assumption capable of proof ? 
That they will not be saved by mere natural religion with- 
out Christ is, of course, certain. But is it certain that the 
judgment-day will not show every human being to have 
had Christ offered to him, and his eternal destiny to have 
been fixed by his accepting or rejecting Christ? On what 
does the " Come ye blessed " and " Depart ye cursed " of 
the judgment-seat depend, but upon " Ye did it," or " Ye 
did it not, — to me"? 

Can it be that " Him hath God set forth a propitiation, 
not for our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world," 
and yet the immense majority for six thousand years have 
no opportunity to avail themselves of his propitiation ? If 
" God so loved the world as to give his Son to die, that 
whosoever believe th in him shall not perish," and if 
Christ came " not to condemn the world, but that the 
world through him might be saved," does it seem likely 
that the almost entire world for sixty centuries must per- 
ish eternally, without any opportunity to believe and be 
saved? 



286 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

No. It cannot be. Christ, who " tasted death for every 
man," Christ, who said, " I, if I be lifted up, will draw all 
men unto me," will not be found at the judgment to have 
been withheld from the immense majority of mankind from 
the beginning of the world to the millennium. 

The offer of Christ to the adult heathen is as probable 
as to heathen infants dying in infancy. The acceptance 
of the offer in the one case is as probable as in the other. 
The salvation of the latter, according to the creeds, de- 
pends entirely on the assumption of their being elect, and 
so comprised in the declaration, " Elect infants dying in 
infancy are regenerated and saved by the Holy Spirit, who 
worketh when and how and where he pleaseth." x But is 
there not as much evidence that some adult heathen are 
elect, as that all dying in infancy are ? By what logic can 
it be proved that in heathen countries all elect persons die 
in infancy, and only the non-elect live to grow up ? If that 
could be proved, would it not diminish someAvhat the horror 
with which the practice of infanticide in past ages has usu- 
ally been regarded? 

If we are at liberty, without any special evidence, and 
chiefly because we like to think so, to consider all heathen 
infants elect, may we not with equal propriety for the same 
reason consider some heathen adults elect, and apply to 
them the words of the Confession, "So also are all other 
elect persons, who are outwardly incapable of being called 
by the Word." There is no more difficulty in regard to 
time, place, and manner, in the case of the adult heathen, 
than in that of the infant. The " when, how, and where 
he pleaseth," which avails for the latter, avails equally for 
the former. 

Hence, however small in any particular age thus far the 
number of adults who find the narrow road, there is no 
evidence that, when we reach the end of the millennium, 

1 Confession of Faith, Chap. X. Sec. 3. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 287 

in which generation after generation have been marching 
in unbroken ranks into the kingdom, we shall find the ma- 
jority of the race ready to say of Christ with the Jews of 
old, " Not this man, but Barabbas." The Arch-apostate 
no doubt likes to have it generally supposed that at the 
very last he will carry the race against Christ by a hand- 
some majority. Let us be careful how we concede to the 
rebellion all it is pleased to claim. 

The Scriptures countenance no such boastful pretence. 
On the contrary, the vote of the overwhelming majority, 
of the race is to put the crown on the brow of the Re- 
deemer, and those who do not say amen are so insignificant 
a minority, that they are nowhere and nothing in the final 
outburst of hosannas. The wicked shall be as though they 
had not been. They shall wake to shame and everlast- 
ing contempt. Nor can we find better language in which 
to sum up our conceptions on this subject than the follow- 
ing, uttered years before we were born, and received by 
Christians generally with unanimous approval : — 

" How vast soever the kingdom of darkness may be, in 
itself considered, it is certainly nothing but the prison of 
the universe, and small compared with the realms of light 
and glory. The misery of that unholy community whose 
exile from heaven is as voluntary as it is just, when the 
eye is fixed upon that only, fills the soul with trembling ; 
but when .... we raise the adoring eye to God, reigning 
throughout his boundless dominions and rejoicing in their 
joy, the world of misery shrinks to a point, and the wail- 
ings of the miserable die away and are lost in the song of 
praise." 1 

Neither of these is the true doctrine of eternal judgment 
which the Holy Spirit sets side by side with repentance 
and faith. They constitute no part or portion of it. They 
are ail more or less of the nature of rebel lies, imposed on 

1 Works of Lyman Beechcr, D.D., Vol. II. p. 18. 



288 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the credulous loyal mind by sleight and cunning craftiness, 
to excite odium against God, manufacture sympathy for the 
rebellion, and prevent true conviction of sin. 

They all hide the true issue, and misrepresent the na- 
ture of the controversy, and tend to keep the revolted will 
from returning to its allegiance. What, then, is the true 
doctrine ? It is this : — 

Some now in rebellion against God will never sub- 
mit, AND THEREFORE WILL NEVER BE PARDONED, BUT WILL 
EXIST FOREVER TO EXPERIENCE THE LEGITIMATE CONSE- 
QUENCES OF THEIR OWN EVIL PASSIONS, AND OF THE FULLY 
REVEALED ABHORRENCE OF GoD AND OF THE HOLY UNI- 
VERSE. 

To this exhibition of the subject two classes may per- 
haps object, — those who think we concede nothing, and 
those who think we concede everything. 

The former will probably say that, if one single soul is to 
suffer eternally, it vitiates for them the bliss of heaven, and 
eclipses the glory of God. 

Of such we would respectfully ask, would you have us 
deny the evidence of the senses which testify the existence 
of lies and murder ? Would you have us concede that 
lying and murder are normal, are divine ? Would you have 
us hold God accountable for the existence of all lying and 
murder, and therefore for their removal ? And is it your 
opinion that because lies and murder have existed six thou- 
sand years consistently with the Divine perfections, there- 
fore they cannot exist another six thousand, and another, 
and so on ad infinitum? Is it your idea of an intuitive 
truth, that what has been cannot be ? 

Is it possible that there is no foundation whatever for 
the tremendous belief of Christendom for so many ages ? 
Is truth all on one side, error all on the other? Or would 
vou desire us to present the cause of the Divine govern- 
ment, at issue with rebellion, in such a light as to make it 
either odious or contemptible? 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 289 

To such as think too great concessions have been made, 
we beg leave to submit, that it is the most honorable as 
well as the most expedient method in controversy, to 
concede all that a fair-minded opponent can reasonably 
claim. Christianity is thoroughly reasonable, — intensely 
so. The voice of God in the whole mediatorial economy 
is, " Come, let us reason together." God needs no false 
premises nor sophistical and fallacious methods. He is not 
obliged to us if we volunteer to defend him by unsound 
arguments. "Will ye lie for God?" he says. It is a 
first principle in theology, as in war, to abandon indefen- 
sible positions, and fortify those which are defensible. 

And why should we not concede all that has now been 
indicated? Can any desire to think that God created 
some on purpose to rebel forever; that He enjoys the 
sufferings of the wicked; that He will exert omnipotence 
for the direct, excruciating torture of state prisoners ? Can 
any one feeL sorry that so many are to be saved, or regret 
that more will not be lost? Can any Christian heart be 
pained at the idea that the race, by an overwhelming vote, 
will put the crown on the brow of the Redeemer ? 

And is it not our true wisdom to concede to the spirit 
of the age all it can with any show of reason claim, and 
join issue only on points so simple, so clearly defensible, 
that our opponents must feel that they are fighting against 
reason, which is fighting against God? 



CHAPTER XXII. 

ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 

" Of resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment." — 
Heb. vi. 2. 

THE doctrine of eternal judgment, we have shown, is 
not, that God created a part of mankind on purpose 
to be miserable forever ; nor that the sufferings of the 
lost will, in themselves considered, enhance the enjoy- 
ment of the saved ; nor that any will be eternally rejected 
who would gladly submit ; nor that there will be a place 
of physical torment by literal fire and brimstone ; nor 
that the Divine government will put state prisoners to the 
torture for the sake of torture ; nor that the great major- 
ity of the race will be lost. 

The true statement of the doctrine, as held by the 
majority of Christians at the present day, and as we pro- 
pose to prove it, is as follows. Some now in rebellion 
against the Divine government will never submit, and 
therefore will never be pardoned, but will exist forever 
to experience the legitimate consequences of their own 
evil passions, and of the fully revealed abhorrence of God, 
and of the holy universe. 

1. Rebellion exists. 

The advocates of universal salvation often, if not al- 
ways, deny this. To deny it, however, one must, appar- 
ently, suppose God's government over mind to be just 
like his government over matter. But this is a mistake. 
They are widely different. The former is moral, over 
accountable agents, by motive ; the latter natural, over 
inert atoms, by necessary causation. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 291 

Under the latter rebellion is impossible. Stones, streams, 
stars, and storms cannot resist his will. If moral govern- 
ment were equally absolute, minds could not. But the 
foundation of moral government is laid in the free consent 
of the governed. God has, indeed, the power to force his 
measures through without the intelligent approval of his 
subjects, but he has no taste for the method of absolutism. 
He is lovely, and desires to be loved with free, spontaneous 
love. He is wise and just, and desires to be obeyed with 
intelligent appreciation. A coerced love, a mechanical and 
slavish obedience, he plainly shows, are his abomination. 

But love that is free is love that can be withheld. If it 
cannot be withheld it is compulsory, and not free ; and 
love that is withheld is rebellion. Hence we might almost 
venture to assign as the definition of moral government, a 
government under which rebellion is possible. To deny, 
then, the possibility of rebellion, is to deny the existence 
of moral government, and consign the universe to unmiti- 
gated absolutism. 

But observation suffices to show that rebellion is not 
only possible, but actual. Lies and murder exist. Yet lies 
and murder are not normal products, or evolutions of a 
Divinely given constitution. To affirm it would be to 
make God the father of lies, and murderer from the begin- 
ning. Lies and murder are unconstitutional and abnormal, 
and therefore just to the extent that they exist rebellion 
exists. 

The existence of rebellion is confirmed also by the exist- 
ence of wide-spread conflict. Only rebellion against a 
wise and benevolent government can account for the dis- 
turbance universally existing under that government. 
The analogies of nature are suggestive of war : darkness 
perpetually pursued by the blazing shield and glancing 
spear of day, winter annually subdued by all-conquering 
summer, the earth reclaimed from briers and thorns to 



292 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

fruitful increase, carnivorous races, in earth, air, and sea, 
warring against the defenceless species, and warred upon 
by man, their defender and king. 

Science points at the same conclusion, by telling us 
that this " has never been such a world as perfect benev- 
olence would have prepared for perfectly holy and happy 
beings." 1 From the earliest geological epochs it has been 
a battle-field between life and death, propagation and de- 
struction. 

History confirms the argument. Almost the earliest, 
certainly the chief occupation of mankind, has been war. 
The drama of the ages is one long campaign between 
civilization and barbarism, liberty and despotism, truth 
and falsehood. Read " The Fifteen Great Battles of the 
World," and see how every one of them has been, with 
increasing clearness as we come down the course of ages, 
a battle of ideas, a step in human progress. 

If then we open the Bible, we find it the most bellige- 
rent book that ever was written. It opens with the an- 
nunciation of a war of races ; it closes with the battle of 
the great day of God Almighty, and the crushing of the 
head of one race by the head of the other. 

The Old Testament, with its alpine chain of miracles, is 
the natural evolution of a plot so sublime. Intimations 
of a wide, outlying conflict repeatedly appear. Our 
eyes are dazzled with the blaze of angelic myrmidons. 
We hear the rush of cherubic wings as the noise of many 
waters. 

The New Testament is still more martial than the Old, 
nor can there be found in the whole compass of human 
literature a development of military destructiveness so 
awful as that disclosed in the emblems of the Apocalypse. 
A rebellion prostrated and punished after age-long war is 
the one idea of the Bible. 

1 Hitchcock's Geology, p. 288. 



ETEENAL JUDGMENT. 293 

2. Rebellion has no tendency to self-recovery. 

It seems to be self-evident that the practice of sin does 
not tend to the establishment of a holy character. The 
habit of lying has no tendency to produce veracity. The 
perpetration of murder does not in the least favor the 
development of true benevolence. 

All the analogies of nature shadow out the possibility of 
irremediable ruin. Disease, curable to a certain point, 
becomes incurable beyond that point. All violations of 
natural law tend to a stage at which they become remedi- 
less. If we enter the realm of will, the same analogies 
meet us. Men form habits of sinful indulgence which they 
know will wreck them temporally and their families ; and 
those habits do become incurable. Men commit them- 
selves to courses of conduct wicked and unprincipled, 
against the clearest light and the convictions of their 
better judgment, and become unchangeably fixed in them. 
Everywhere we are met by the startling phenomenon of 
what may be called a tyrannical free-agency. A free 
choice in a wrong direction, — so free that there is in it 
no element of self-reversal. 

This is the tendency of rebellion, as we see it in our 
country before our eyes. Mercy and justice alike enrage 
it. Its inveteracy is equally enhanced by success and by 
defeat. So with rebellion against God. Sin has no ten- 
dency whatever to reformation. Such is the testimony of 
experience and observation. The testimony of the Bible 
is only a repetition of that of nature. Sinners are deaf, 
blind, palsy-stricken, mad, possessed, dead, in Scripture 
parlance, not because they cannot submit to God, but 
because their will is all expended in the direction of 
revolt, and has no tendency to flow back. 

Sacred history illustrates this mournful truth. The 
flood was God's verdict " incurable" on the antediluvian 
empire of the Titans. The overthrow of Sodom pro- 



294 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

claimed a corruption beyond the reach of motive. Nations 
have uniformly degenerated, never risen in the scale, 
except in consequence of Divine intervention ; and then, 
only after desperate resistance. 

The Jews are a case in point. They were stiff-necked 
and rebellious from the first. The impetuous tide of 
revolt, dammed up by the law, rose, overflowed, burst 
through, undermined, and foamed on its turbid way. 
Stopped here, it broke out there. Checked there, it un- 
dermined elsewhere. The whole Mosaic dike and mound 
was full of jets, and seemed every instant about to dis- 
solve and sink and be swept away. They worshipped a 
calf at Sinai's foot. They burned children to Moloch. 
God repeatedly declares them worse than the heathen. 
They broke every statute. Each generation surpassed in 
guilt the preceding. Nothing stood for two generations 
as God placed it. They stoned the prophets, and when 
Christ came they crucified him. Christianity was, indeed, 
given to the world through the Jews, but it was in spite 
of them. 

Among Gentiles, revelation has fared no better. Man 
has done little but corrupt the Gospel. It has never ele- 
vated a single heart, till a lively resistance has been over- 
come by the special influences of the Holy Spirit. Hence 
all experience and revelation render it certain that there is 
in rebellion itself no tendency to self-recovery ; and that, 
if God do not reclaim rebels, they never will be reclaimed. 

3. If God do not reclaim rebels by that system he has 
contrived and adapted to the purpose, he certainly will 
not without that system, or where its appliances and adap- 
tations do not exist. If a man is to build a ship, he must 
have certain conveniences and tools. If he cannot build 
one with all his appliances, it is certain he cannot without. 

Now the mediatorial system, comprehensively consid- 
ered, including all its parts, is the highest embodiment 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT.' 295 

of Divine contrivance for two joint objects, namely, the 
detaching from rebellion, and restoration to loyalty, of as 
many as possible, and the total suppression and punish- 
ment of the rebellion itself. The Gospel is the wisdom of 
God and power of God for both of these objects, not for 
either singly. It is expressly declared to be, even under 
inspired ministrations, " a savor of life unto life and of 
death unto death." In this world God has instituted the 
highest form of attack infinite wisdom could devise, upon 
a long-established, deeply rooted, and thoroughly organized 
rebellion, side by side with the highest known agencies for 
detaching rebels from the revolt, and restoring them to 
loyalty. 

There are many, indeed, who seem to regard this world 
as a sin-producing contrivance. They imagine that it is so 
powerfully adapted to produce sin that it is useless to try 
to be holy. The soul is pure, but this world defiles, it; 
the spirit is honest, but the world makes it deceitful ; the 
heart is benevolent and godly, but this world forces selfish- 
ness and ungodliness upon it. The man himself would be 
holy, if he had a fair chance, but circumstances will not 
let him. God has contrived the body so as to fasten sin 
upon the innocent spirit against its will ; he has contrived 
the whole material and social system with wonderful power 
to drag down, deprave, and pollute the soul, and frustrate 
all its laudable endeavors after righteousness. To have 
a fair chance for virtue, one must die and get out of this 
world into one better adapted to its cultivation. 

But what evidence is there that other worlds will be less 
depraving than this ? If God can contrive one world to 
produce sin, he can another. If he has done it once, he 
may again. If there was nothing in his character to 
prevent his establishing a vast sin-manufactory, there is 
nothing to prevent him from establishing any number of 
them and keeping them agoing forever. Is it, indeed, 



296 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

reasonable to infer that, because God has made the uni- 
verse, so far as known, with admirable adaptations to 
corrupt and deprave, therefore he has made it, so far as 
not known, to purify and reform ? 

If this world is divinely adapted to produce sin, it is 
illogical in the highest degree to infer that therefore other 
worlds are adapted to produce holiness. On the other 
hand, if this world is divinely adapted not to produce sin, 
but to detach as many as possible from rebellion while 
prostrating the power of revolt, then what need is there 
of a better ? Why ask for better than best ? Why argue 
that, because here God has lavished all the resources of 
omniscience, therefore elsewhere he has surpassed them ? 

Now God declares that all things were made by Christ 
and for Christ. The material universe was built for 
redemptive ends. Nature exists in its present form sub- 
serviently to mediatorial designs. The material system is 
not of itself defiling, but auxiliary to cure. The body is 
not corrupting to the soul. " There is nothing from with- 
out a man that, entering into him, can defile him, .... 
that which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. 
For from within out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, 
adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, 
wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, 
pride, foolishness. All these things come from within, 
and defile the man." 

All the corrupting influences there are in the world are 
from within, not from without ; exerted by depraved 
spirits upon the system, not by the system upon sinless 
spirits. The guilty spirit abuses the body, degrades the 
family, perverts society, corrupts business, and pollutes 
civil and ecclesiastical institutions. There is nothing in 
the body, the family, society, business, church, or state, 
that tends to corrupt the soul, but the reverse. The 
motives to good behavior, drawn from these sources, are 



ETEENAL JUDGMENT. 297 

mighty, and no one becomes reprobate without a terrible 
battle with and victory over them. 

In this world, too, it is possible for the loyal and the 
disloyal to live together as husband and wife, parent and 
child, neighbor and friend, without distinctly perceiving 
the profound antagonism existing between them. Salu- 
tary influences are thus exerted of incalculable force by 
the former on the latter. Eternity only can reveal the 
amazing aggregate of motive necessary to be resisted in 
order to become reprobate. In other worlds, however, no 
such mixing of opposite characters by artificial relation- 
ships is possible. The moment souls pass behind the veil, 
they find the chasm between the holy and the sinful, the 
loyal and those in rebellion, a great gulf, fixed, and inca- 
pable of being passed over. 

Here, then, in this life on earth, is the only place in the 
wide universe where things are contrived and adapted 
with reference to recovery. And here they not only are 
so contrived, but, in Christ's atoning death and mediation, 
and the gracious influences of the Spirit, carried to the 
highest point possible under the circumstances. 

If, now, the restorationist denies that reformatory influ- 
ences are in the ascendant, and affirms that temptation 
amounts to a fatality, we ask him what sort of being it is 
who could make such a world, and send unfallen innocent 
spirits into it to be corrupted ? The supposition enthrones 
an infinite Devil over the universe. It is therefore false. 
The world is remedial. Temptation is not fatality. Re- 
formatory influences are vastly preponderant. And the 
reason souls are not reformed is, that they bring with 
them into life a strength of sinful habit, and a power of 
resistance that neutralizes the remedial agencies employed, 
and preads contagion and death on every side. 

What hospital is not defiled by the malignant diseases 
that are healed therein? What school of reform is not 

13* 



298 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

impregnated with the effluvia of the degraded classes 
undergoing the process of reform ? What country is not 
desolated by the war necessary to prostrate rebellion ? 
And how is it conceivable a proud, false, and cruel apos- 
tasy could be dealt with, both for destruction and for resto- 
ration, in a world that would not be wrecked and racked 
and desecrated and defiled during the process? 

The remedial powers of God's moral system cannot be 
justly estimated till after the battle of the great day of 
God Almighty, when the power of rebellion is broken, its 
chief confined, its organization dissolved, and the efficacy 
of mediatorial remedies developed in a pacified world in 
full millennial omnipotence. 

If, then, rebellion have in itself no recuperative ten- 
dencies ; if only God can conquer it, or redeem from it ; 
if God can do so only by the mediatorial system he has 
instituted for that express purpose ; then those not re- 
deemed by that never will be redeemed, but remain eter- 
nally fixed in rebellion. 

4. There are some who will never be cured by this sys- 
tem, because they were already incurable before it was 
made, and it was not designed to attempt impossibilities. 

There is one rebel known to Scripture under various 
titles, among which one of the most significant is the Ad- 
versary, a term appropriate to the head of a great rebellion, 
just as Captain of Salvation, and Lord of Hosts, are titles 
appropriate to the head of the movement for the suppression 
of rebellion and restoration of the penitent to favor. 

There are those who would regard the Devil as a mere 
abstraction, an allegory, a fable. But they might as reason- 
ably call Mr. Davis an abstraction or slavery an allegory. 
Rebellion and despotism are not such abstractions in human 
experience as to justify the turning of the originator of all 
rebellion and all despotism into a myth. The existence of 
Jehovah is no more clearly revealed in the Bible and in 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 299 

nature than the existence of Satan. The being of God can 
be as rationally turned into an abstraction, a fable, as the 
being of the Devil. And the denial of the latter, as all 
experience shows, is the logical prelude to the denial of the 
former. For if the Devil be not the father of lies, the 
inevitable conclusion is that Jehovah must be. But this 
is so shocking that the mind reacts into pantheism, which 
is virtual atheism. If, then, the being of a personal God 
be certain, the being of the Arch-rebel against God, liar, 
and father of it, murderer from the beginning, is no less 
certain. 

Now, is there any reason to believe the atonement was 
intended for Satan? Does the Bible say Christ partook 
flesh and blood, " that through death he might save him 
that had the power of death, that is, the Devil " ? Was the 
Son of God manifested for this cause, " that he might save 
the works of the Devil " ? Scripture often speaks of salva- 
tion from the Devil, but where is there a hint of such a 
thing as salvation for Mm ? The silence of the Bible on that 
head is awfully significant. Its express declarations are 
more awful. Christ himself implies that from the founda- 
tion of the world everlasting fire was prepared for the 
Devil and his angels. For that the world was founded, to 
destroy his power, to cast him down, to make him the 
object of the fully revealed abhorrence of God, and the 
abhorrence of the holy universe. And at the close of the 
Bible we see it done. 

Here, then, is one rebel who never will submit, and 
never will be pardoned. And one well-authenticated in- 
stance is enough to settle the principle. Make eternal 
judgment certain in a single instance, and there is nothing 
left to contend about. But it is not a single case. With 
the Devil are included his angels. They are cast out with 
him; they share his fate. So that eternal judgment is 
established, not for a unit, but for a class. 



300 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

But it may be said, Why will not the Devil be annihi- 
lated ? And strong pleadings have been recently put forth 
in behalf of this conception. We reply, The language of the 
Bible, according to any principles of interpretation yet 
known, is against the idea. The solemn language of Scrip- 
ture is, " He shall be tormented day and night, for ever and 
ever." Nor is there any valid reason why the plain import 
of these words should be overruled. 

Why should the author of rebellion and the guiltiest of 
rebels be permitted to escape from the duty of submission ? 
Is it not his duty to submit ? Has the law of God ceased 
to be binding on him? Has not the Divine government 
made issue with him on that point from the beginning? 
Has not Lucifer denied the right of government to hold 
him to his allegiance, and manifest displeasure at his re- 
fusal ? And must the government, at last, recede virtually 
from its position, and cease to insist upon submission as both 
possible and reasonable ? 

To annihilate the rebel would be, on the part of the 
government, equivalent to a surrender of the whole point 
in controversy from the beginning. It would be to say to 
the arch-conspirator, Your refusal to submit is so far reason- 
able, that further prosecution of the claims of government 
would be too severe ; lie down, therefore, in oblivion, and 
rest day and night forever. 

5. There are some rebels who will wilfully resist all the 
influences of the remedial system, and become in so doing 
eternally hardened hi rebellion. 

It will be admitted that Christ was a perfect teacher. 
The father openly declared himself well pleased with his 
ministry, saying, " Hear ye him ! " Even his enemies con- 
fessed, " Never man spake like this man." Nor was the ef- 
fect of his teaching neutralized by any inconsistency or sin in 
the teacher. In his mouth was no guile. He was a lamb with- 
out spot, holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners. 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 801 

Now, Christ could read the heart. He could see when 
truth had its proper contact with the mind, and when it was 
decisively rejected. Did Christ meet any such cases ? He 
did. There was a class of men, most intelligent and highly 
cultivated, who often heard, and with whose minds the evi- 
dence of his mission had full contact, who yet rejected him. 

Between Christ and this class an antagonism develops 
itself even more decided than that between him and the 
unclean spirits who cry out on his approach, " What have 
I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high ? Art 
thou come hither to torment us before the time ? " For 
while demons thus believe and tremble, there are mortal 
men who dare to say, " This fellow doth not cast out demons 
but by Beelzebub, the prince of demons." 

He on his part unhesitatingly accepts the issue. " Ye 
are of your father the Devil, and the lusts of your father 

ye will do Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how 

can ye escape the damnation of hell ? . . . . Woe unto you, 
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites ! Ye compass sea and land 
to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him 
twofold more the child of hell than yourselves ! " Nor is 
this antagonism a phenomenon peculiar to that age. It is 
present through all history from dawn till eve, recognizable 
even by the semi-prophetic instinct of the popular nomen- 
clature. 

The apostolic conception of the interval between Christ 
and the millennium was that of a period in which a great 
apostasy should run its course, under the auspices of a class 
described as " speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their con- 
sciences seared as with a hot iron." Of this class, Paul 
says, " Because they received not the love of the truth that 
they might be saved, therefore God shall send them strong 
delusions that they should believe a lie, that they might all 
be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in 
unrighteousness. ' ' 



802 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

The ripe embodiment of this apostasy in the man of sin, 
he says, " The Lord shall consume with the spirit of his 
mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming." 
Peter also speaks of a class of minds, corrupt and fixed in 
sin under the very focus of Gospel rays, as " sporting them- 
selves with their own deceivings while they feast with you, 
having eyes full of adultery, that cannot cease from sin, an 
heart exercised with covetous practices, cursed children, 
wells without water, clouds carried with a tempest, to whom 
is reserved the mist of darkness forever ! " 

In the Apocalypse, that grand and solemn panorama of 
things temporal and eternal, this class is denoted by a harlot 
drunk with blood riding upon a wild beast, and those led 
and governed by them are characterized as worshipping a 
beast, and receiving his mark in then forehead and in their 
hand. The symbolization includes all civil and ecclesiastical 
despots, and their willing slaves. For next to the wicked- 
ness of being a tyrant is that of submitting to despotism for 
the sake of ease, wealth, and carnal prosperity. The beast 
and harlot, and all who receive the mark, are described as 
not written in the Lamb's book of life, or as having had 
their names blotted out. They are spoken of as deceived 
by the Devil, with whom they are finally cast into the lake 
of fire, which is the second death. 

Here the curtain falls upon them. Here the Bible leaves 
them, saying, " He that is unjust, let him be unjust still ; 
and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still ; and he that is 
righteous, let him be righteous still ; and he that is holy, let 
him be holy still " ; and, " Without are dogs, and sorcerers, 
whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whatso- 
ever loveth and maketh a he." 

Thus God declares most solemnly that there will be those 
who will reject the Gospel, on whom it will make no salu- 
tary impression, who will become fixed in sin. They have 
no tendency to reform themselves. He has done for them 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 303 

all he can consistently do. He will not violate their free 
agency. He will let them alone. They will treasure up 
wrath against the day of wrath. They will go out into 
eternity incorrigible in sin. Yet it will be just as consistent 
with benevolence to prolong their existence then as it is 
now. The consequence will be, the law will execute itself 
in them and upon them forevermore. They will be a mi- 
nority, a number never receiving accession. But the holy 
universe will go on, eternally increasing and expanding, 
until the disproportion will be inconceivably vast. They 
will be a fraction so small, so infinitesimally minute, that 
their existence will cease to affect seriously the sensibility 
of the stupendous whole. 

This is the argument. Is it sound ? Is it fair ? It may 
not convince you. But can you meet it ? Can you seri- 
ously object to one of its positions ? I appeal to your 
honest judgment. Do you think I have misinterpreted the 
word of God ? There may be plausible objections, cavils, 
sophistries. Passages may be tampered with in detail, — 
one by one forced by great ingenuity from their too obvious 
sense, — but what of that ? 

There is one thing I have never seen attempted, namely, 
to show how so many details happened to he ; how they hap- 
pened to need such exceeding dexterity to parry their 
meaning, how they happen to combine and cohere, pointing 
with tremendous circumstantial evidence to one, and only 
one conclusion. It is this that gives to circumstantial evi- 
dence its terrible power with a jury. And to this I appeal 
as unanswerable in the Bible. For if eternal judgment be 
not plainly the doctrine of the Bible, I see not how it can 
be shown to be the doctrine of any uninspired book or 
creed, or the belief of any man or body of men on the ace 
of the earth. Thus the denial of eternal judgment subverts 
the foundations of all reasoning, and plunges us into unlim- 
ited scepticism. 



804 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Let us now glance for a moment at some of those objec- 
tions that are most commonly employed to break the force 
of evidence, and shut out the fearful looking for of judg- 
ment and fiery indignation that shall devour the adversary. 

1. What have I done that is so very bad ? What that 
can merit endless torments? 

You have done enough to need forgiveness, have you 
not ? Or do you propose to rob God of all chance of show- 
ing mercy by bringing him in debt to you ? If you need 
to be forgiven, and will not submit and ask pardon, you 
deserve His displeasure moment by moment till you do, if 
it is forever. 

2. But I believe men are punished as they go along as 
much as they deserve, and therefore all will finally be saved. 

If so, there is no such thing as forgiveness. The state 
cannot forgive a convict who has served out his time in the 
state-prison. The Divine government cannot both punish 
rebels to the last farthing, and yet forgive them. Therefore 
all that is said in the Bible about mercy, pardon, forgive- 
ness, free grace, according to this, is a mere delusion. 

3. But if God wanted me good, why did he not make 
me so? 

He did. Why have you marred his work ? 

4. But why did God permit me to rebel ? 

Permit ? — permit what he forbids ? A government 
permit rebellion against itself? Is, then, permission and 
prohibition the same in your opinion? 

5. But God is omnipotent. He had the power. Why 
did he not exert it to render my rebellion impossible ? 

And what is this but to tell God that nothing but omnip- 
otence could make you love him ? All he asked was your 
love. You refused it and rebelled. And you now virtually 
assign as a reason, that he did not make it impossible. How 
much would your love be worth to God on such terms ? 
" I shall not love you if I can help it. You can make me, 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 305 

because you are omnipotent, and can do anything. But so 
long as you leave me free, nothing shall persuade me not to 
hate you." 

6. But it is unaccountable to me how a perfectly holy 
«being could sin. 

If you could account for it, it would not- be sin. To 
account for a thing is to assign some cause or reason for its 
existence. But a cause or reason is an excuse, and an 
excuse is a justification. But a justifiable sin is no sin. 
Sin that is excusable is a contradiction. It is of the very 
essence of sin that it is unjustifiable, inexcusable, and 
therefore, absolutely unaccountable. Sin is anomalous and 
mysterious by its very nature. It is portentous and irra- 
tional from its very birth. To say sin is unaccountable, 
therefore, is nothing but to say, sin is sin. 

7. But, after all, though this seems specious, I cannot 
conceive how it is possible a perfectly upright being should 
fall. 

Can you conceive of any but an upright being falling ? 
Must not a thing stand upright before it can possibly fall 
down ? Must not a thing be on the right side of the line 
of rectitude before it can cross over that line, that is, trans- 
gress to the wrong side ? 

8. But you never can make me see how a perfectly 
truthful being could become the father of lies. 

Hold. Let us try and see. Lies do, in fact, exist. Men 
do not always speak the truth. You cannot say that God 
is the father of lies. You do not suppose lies existed from 
eternity. There must have been a first lie, and a first liar. 
Moreover, a being must first exist before he can lie. Now 
what was the first liar, before he told the first lie ? Do you 
not see he was not a liar, and could not be, before he told 
the first lie, for that would be to say there was a lie before 
the first lie. Either, then, God created him in the act of 
telling a he, or else he existed in the truth, before he told 

i 



306 * REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the first lie, as Christ says : " He abode not in the truth. 
He is a liar, and the father of it." 

9. But, if there is a rebellion, it seems to have the upper 
hand. The Devil seems to have it pretty much his own 
way, so far, in this w T orld. And though eighteen centuries 
have rolled away since Calvary, things seem worse than 
ever. 

But remember that, though a thousand years to us 
seem long, to God, who inhabits eternity, and measures 
on the scale of infinity, a thousand years are as one day. 
God can afford to bear the insults of rebellion, and sup- 
press the tokens of his just displeasure for a thousand years, 
more easily than this government can afford to exercise 
forbearance towards rebellion a single day. Now have not 
the clemency and the severity of the government of this 
land alike exasperated rebellion ? And in proportion as we 
have driven it in from the frontiers and seaboard on its 
main centres, has it not fortified those centres, and become 
relatively stronger and more intensely malignant? And 
if rebellion should be crushed, would not its greatest rage, 
and its highest concentration of strength, be at the very 
time and place of the last decisive attack ? 

Enough, then. You know why it is that things are as 
they are in this world. Shut off from all other worlds, — 
hemmed in, — the Devil has come down in great wrath, 
knowing he hath but a short time ; and the intensity of his 
rage, the malignity of the forms of sin, the concentration 
of all elements of resistance to Christ, proclaim unmistak- 
ably that we are just on the eve of the decisive battle, the 
battle of the great day of God Almighty. But, think you, 
the righteous displeasure of God will be any the less dread- 
ful for this patience of centuries and cycles ? — and is the 
Divine forbearance a motive to go on treasuring up wrath 
against the day of wrath ? 

10. But if God knew rebellion would break out, and 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 307 

some persist forever, why did he create those ? How can 
he let them suffer forever, when he need not have created 
them ? 

And what is this but to hold the government virtually 
accountable for the rebellion, and liable for its debts? 
God might have prevented the rebellion, and did not. 
Therefore he is responsible for it; and therefore he can- 
not punish it, but is bound to secure the restoration of 
every one implicated. Will that style of logic bear exami- 
nation ? Does it not virtually put rebellion on the judg- 
ment-seat, and summon the Divine government to the 
bar ? Does it not make the chief conspirator say to the 
Supreme Executive, " Why hast thou suffered thyself to 
be rebelled against? " Can the absurdity of this be paral- 
leled by anything save its effrontery, its guilt ? 

All these objections are nothing but reasons offered by 
rebellion why it should not submit, and why the govern- 
ment should surrender at discretion. Lay them aside. 
Bring the doctrine to a practical test. In what does the 
actual condition of your mind, if impenitent, differ from 
what it would be in eternity as a lost soul? 

There, the simple fact would be, you would voluntarily 
choose wrong and suffer. Is not that what you are doing 
now ? Does not God bring motives to bear on you, and 
do you not resist them ? Are you not every day accustom- 
ing yourself to resist all the motives God does bring ; and 
is it not probable you will thus acquire the habit so as to 
resist all motive he ever will bring? 

Why do you not now exert the power of your free 
agency? God is now bringing motives to bear. This 
argument is a motive. A present spirit is a motive. Your 
own conscience is a motive. Your Saviour and his bleed- 
ing wounds are motives. Heaven's glories are motives. 
The angels that wait to rejoice over you are motives. 
The hatefulness of selfishness and rebellion is a motive. 



308 EEDEEMEK AND REDEEMED. 

The loveliness of obedience and benevolence is a motive. 
God's honor and glory, and your sonship to him are mo- 
tives. The woe and despair of endless banishment are 
motives. The horror of society with Satan and reprobate 
spirits is a motive. And all these motives are now present. 
It is the time for their use. God is employing them. It 
is their legitimate purpose to secure now, if ever, by the 
preached Gospel, the right exercise of your free agency. 

Left to yourself, you will never exercise it aright. There- 
fore God does not leave you to yourself. He follows you. 
He thrusts the subject on you. It is disagreeable to you, 
but that only shows how certain it is you never would 
reclaim yourself if left alone. You want to be let alone, 
but he will not let you alone. He gathers all these mo- 
tives and thrusts them on you. He rolls the responsibility 
upon you. He threatens. He invites. Your conscience 
is troubled. Your peace is disturbed. You cannot evade 
the subject. God's motives throng in about your soul, so 
that now, — in this day of salvation, — you may choose 
right and so be reclaimed forever. Do you now resist ? 
Do you fight off the subject ? Can you, now, with despe- 
rate opposition, break away from God and rush on in sin ? 

How can you expect ever to be reached by motives, if 
you so resist them now ? Will God's love touch your heart 
a million years hence, when it falls like a sunbeam on a 
rock now? Will Christ seem lovely to your soul when 
ages older in sin ? Christ is near you now. You see him. 
His cross stands before you. You hear his expiring groans. 
You see the blood flowing for your sins. He turns his lan- 
guid eye on you ! But your hard heart feels no impression. 
You care not. You laugh, you trifle. You care more for 
a song, a jest, a piece of gold, a cup of wine, some toy of 
earth, than for him. Will a million years' added ingratitude 
make that heart tender? Will ages of implacable rejection 
and scorn make you more impressible ? 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 309 

The very motives God employs now are the highest, 
most perfect, to which an intelligent being can be subject, — 
a being with a heart. Eternity could only repeat them. If 
you triumph over them when you are young and they fresh, 
how can you expect to yield when you are far on hi eter- 
nity and they have lost the charm of novelty ? You shrink 
from Christ now ; will you not recoil then ? If now the 
advancing shadow of Christ's presence makes your hardened 
soul almost cry out, " Let me alone ; what have I to do 
with thee ? " will ages of hardening in sin diminish that 
conscious antagonism ? 

And yet all your hope for eternity rests on the mad idea 
that motives which utterly fail here, where the advantages 
are greater, — where you are more impressible, and they 
more fresh, — will then succeed where the chances are all 
against them, the gloss of novelty gone, your susceptibility 
deadened, and conscience seared as with a hot iron. If 
this be not the very acme of insanity, at least to the clear- 
seeing eye of God, what can be ? 

And even if your anticipation were not preposterous, it 
would be base and dishonorable. If it were true that God 
would make you love him a million years hence, is that a 
reason for hating him now ? If he will bring you to repent 
and believe in Christ in eternity, will you therefore mock 
Christ in time ? If, after death, he will purify and forgive 
you, is that an argument with you to be as vile and disobe- 
dient as you please in life ? 

O child ! child ! what logic is this, what desperate wicked- 
ness, what midnight darkness of soul ! My mother has 
patiently toiled for me from morning to night, therefore I 
will let her slave as long as she lives ! She always has for- 
given me ; I am sure of her forgiveness, no matter how I 
treat her, therefore I '11 fill her house with riot, insult her 
gray hairs, and inherit her property after she has pardoned 
me with her dying breath. 



310 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Is this your plea ? God has been long-suffering toward 
you. All your guilt he has seen, but refrained from fully 
punishing. Christ has loved you, and poured out his blood 
for you. The spirit has striven to reclaim you to honorable 
affection and filial duty. Patiently God has waited and 
borne with your strange manners, your waywardness, and 
insult. And because you think he will bear it, and will 
contrive finally to make you decent, therefore you give 
way to temptation, throw the reins on the neck of passion, 
cast off fear, restrain prayer, and say to God, "Depart 
from me, for I desire not the knowledge of thy ways." 

O man ! How can this be ! How can a mortal act thus, 
and maintain his self-complacency? How can a rational 
being follow such courses, flattering himself till his iniquity 
becomes hateful? 

O sinner ! Your sins are high as mountains ! They are 
black as ink. The dimensions of your guilt are incalculable. 
The depth of the abyss of guile and depravity in which you 
are sunk is unfathomable. You are in the horrible pit and 
the miry clay. Your heart is deceitful above all things and 
desperately wicked. You are undone. If God should flash 
full conviction on you, it would shrivel you like the blast of 
a furnace ! If anything can merit the description " lost" 
it is a soul so abandoned to dishonor and ungodliness as 
yours. Dead in trespasses and sins, covered from head to 
foot with the foul leprosy. Unwilling to be clean, because 
expecting to be cleansed in some unknown vague hereafter ! 
Reluctant to be made whole, because anticipating a miracu- 
lous transformation after death ! Incorrigible, because of 
expected correction ; inexorable, because to be persuaded 
by and by. Leagued and banded with Christ's foes, because 
to be enrolled his friend at the judgment. Under bonds of 
Satan here, because expecting to serve Christ hereafter. 
Living in sin to die in the Lord. Friend of the world and 
enemy of God below, because heir of God and joint-heir 



ETERNAL JUDGMENT. 311 

with Christ above. Paradox of guilt, climax of absurdity ! 
Rushing on ruin ! Making haste to perdition ! Touching 
the very threshold of everlasting downfall ! Your plea is 
false, your theory delusive, your expectation vain, your hope 
a spider's-web. Without apology for your sin, bearing the 
wrath of God, bound to the judgment ! 

O shiner, pause ! Stop before it is too late. You cannot 
strive with your Maker. You cannot contend with him. 
You cannot endure his calm, yet just and infinite displeasure. 
O repent, and fly from the wrath to come ! 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

CONDITION OF THE LOST. 
" For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, anq 

LOSE HIMSELF, OR BE CAST AWAY ? " — Luke ix. 25. 

IN these words we have a question whose solution out- 
runs the rules of arithmetic, and bids defiance to the 
ordinary processes of numerical calculation. It is a ques- 
tion of profit and loss in the business of eternity, the 
merchandise of unending ages. He who died for the soul 
summons us to estimate its value, to strike the balance be- 
tween earthly gain and heavenly loss, between temporal 
success and everlasting failure. 

I shall not, at this time, dwell particularly on the value 
of this world, its brevity, uncertainty, the difficult attain- 
ment and unsatisfying nature of its joys. You all know 
that no man ever does gain the whole world, and that, if he 
did, it would not make hhn happy. Leaving this part of 
the subject to the mind of each and all, I propose to dwell 
awhile on the other alternative, and what may be involved 
in losing one's self, or being cast away. 

One element of loss will be the forfeiture of self-respect. 

In this world men contrive to be on good terms with 
themselves. They invent excuses, self-justifications ; they 
are naked, but not ashamed. But in eternity each mind 
will have its own condition fully revealed to it. And 
when a man is ashamed of himself, without excuse in his 
own sight, yet without contrition, then the charm of self- 
society is at an end forever. 

With no intention of amendment, with a will of iron 



CONDITION OF THE LOST. 313 

and a brow of brass, hating the throne of God, as rebel- 
lion always hates good government, he will, nevertheless, 
know perfectly that he is in the wrong utterly, from begin- 
ning to end, and the throne of God spotless. 

He has lost, secondly, that respect of all creatures which 
is the foundation of social enjoyment. 

From the society of the good the bad will be forever 
voluntarily separate. The loyal and the disloyal, when 
the truth concerning the rebellion is fully known, will go 
apart with infinite antagonism. The enemies of Christ 
could no more breathe the same air with his friends, than 
traitors to this government can live in friendship with 
those loyal to the government. Yet the society of heaven, 
with its purity, its refinement, its sympathy, its lofty intel- 
ligence and radiant affection, will appear to those who 
never more can enjoy it desirable beyond description. 
But it is lost. They have lost the society of the kind, 
reasonable, sympathetic, and holy, for that of the cruel, 
unreasonable, heartless, and vile. 

Another element of loss will be the failure of every 
source of intellectual enjoyment and progress. 

This arises from the fact that all the universe, being 
created by God, manifests his wisdom and his character. 
And all truth being an unfolding of his thoughts, is con- 
nected with him, and suggests him. It is possible for a 
man in this world to pursue various branches of study, 
and contrive not to see God in them, although he is there ; 
although in the most abstruse sciences — geometry, astron- 
omy, mathematics — God is present, although he pervades 
all nature and all history, yet it is the peculiarity of the 
present material economy that it is left optional with men 
whether they will see him or not. 

But in eternity this will not be so. It will not be op- 
tional to see or not to see God's presence and character in 
all truth. There will be no part of the universe, and no 

14 



314 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

branch of science, in which he will not be brought up, and 
stand, as it were, in his true character, face to face with 
the mind. 

Now if the mind does not love him, this revelation of 
his being and character will be painful, and will make all 
possible branches of science and knowledge painful. The 
soul will be thrown off from knowledge and intellectual 
progress forever by its antipathy to God, the sun and scien- 
tific centre of the universe. At the same time it will know 
what knowledge is. It will realize what its career might 
have been. It will see what the redeemed are doing. 
From its own self-imposed darkness and stagnation it will 
look out upon a universe growing and developing in 
knowledge forever, and will see that it might have kept 
pace with the foremost, — might have shone like a star of 
the firmament; but all that is lost, and, instead, it is be- 
come " a wandering star, to whom is reserved the blackness 
of darkness forever." 

Another element of loss is that of the manifested appro- 
bation of God. 

The power of God to bless his creatures by signifying 
his approbation is infinite. Instances are seen in the death 
of martyrs, where the pains of the body have seemed an- 
nihilated by the joys of the soul. Now in heaven God 
will exert that power to the full. The redeemed will be 
made as fully conscious, not only of his affection, his love, 
but of his approbation, as their finite faculties admit. And 
it will be the highest element of their joy and strength. 
Now all beings will be aware of this. It will by no means 
be hid from the wicked. Lucifer will eternally see that 
those he tried to blast are not only safe, but recipients of 
God's infinite approval ; and lost men will see it, and real- 
ize that they might be enjoying the same, but are not. 
They have lost it, and lost it forever. 

Another element of loss will be that of exalted station. 



CONDITION OF THE LOST. 315 

All that is denoted by the crown of glory, and joint- 
heirship with Christ, and reigning with him forever; all 
that is indicated by being kings and priests unto God, asso- 
ciated with Christ in the judgment of the world and of 
angels ; all that which is called " a far more exceeding and 
eternal weight of glory," will be lost. A sense of its worth 
will be realized by seeing it in actual exercise by the re- 
deemed. They will be seen shining above the brightness 
of the firmament, exalted far above angels, principalities, 
and powers; intensely luminous and glorious, nearest to 
Christ of all orders and ranks of being ; and all this, the 
soul will say, was appointed to me, redeemed for me, by 
blood divine, — might have been mine, but for my own 
inexcusable folly and guilt. 

O, what must be the feelings of him who was once a 
bright archangel, son of the morning, now fallen and 
degraded, when he thinks of his original exaltation, and 
reflects that it might have been his forever ! What emo- 
tions must fill the hearts of those angelic hosts he led 
away, when they see their seats occupied by others ; even 
by those they so long tempted, oppressed, enslaved, and 
held in gloomy and disgraceful bondage ! 

Still more poignant will be the sense of loss, of ruined 
men, who, instead of being crowned above the unfallen, 
will be degraded beneath the fallen angels, their victims 
and their slaves. " I have exchanged," the castaway will 
exclaim, " the highest place in the universe for the lowest ; 
lordship for bondage, supremacy for slavery. I have lost 
endless dominion over holy myriads, and have become the 
servant of convicts and outcasts forever. 

In the present world men do not believe this. They 
will believe neither the one extreme of possible exaltation 
nor the other of possible degradation. Not because it is 
not plainly revealed; — it is not in the power of words to 
reveal it more plainly; — but because words have lost 



316 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

their power, — because they will not hear, will not believe, 
will not understand. But in eternity the reality will arrest 
them. The accomplished reality of the exalted glory of 
the faithful will nevermore be hid from them ; the consum- 
mate reality of their own dishonor and extreme degradation 
will forever realize itself to their minds. It will no longer 
be possible to deny it, or misunderstand it, or forget it. 

Should the chiefs of the rebellion in this land be finally 
seized, and condemned to hard labor among felons, we can 
imagine how they would look back on the time before the 
rebellion, when they were loyal, when they trod the floors 
of Congress, and when their eloquence shook the Senate, 
and their wisdom contributed to shape the legislation of a 
vast continental empire ! But now that the rebellion is 
crushed and they are convicts, eloquence is not for them, 
statesmanship and jurisprudence, the lofty and ennobling 
aims of legislation and government, the exhilarating excite- 
ments of public affairs, — all are theirs no more. They 
move with the chain-gang, and break stones on the road. 
They see men, once their inferiors, thunder along in state, 
engrossed in those high affairs that they so well remember, 
casting a glance of mingled pity and abhorrence as they 
pass ; and, stung to the soul, they continue their degrading 
toil till night remands them to their cell. 

But all these things shik into nothing, compared with 
the wrath of God. 

Infinite love, truth, and rectitude is offended with ob- 
stinate rebels moment by moment, because they do not 
submit. All their rebellion they repeat each successive 
moment. The whole malignity of their guilty career is 
gathered up and concentrated, as it were, in every instant 
of refusal to bow. 

God sees it there. They see it. They see that it is 
wicked as plainly as God sees it, but they will not give 
up ; and that obstinacy excites God's intense displeasure. 



CONDITION OF THE LOST. 317 

It is not that they cannot yield, but that they can and 
will not. It is not that they have been guilty and deserv- 
ing of wrath, but that they voluntarily continue to be. 
The entire rebellion is taken up and carried on fresh and 
immortal in every moment of refusal to repent, and the 
displeasure of God is eternally fresh as towards a present 
offence. 

It is not wrath for sins long past, merely ; it is wrath 
for a state of mind that virtually repeats all the sins of 
ages in each successive moment. Against that, the wrath 
of God will justly burn forever as a consuming fire. 
They ought to submit ; they can submit ; they would be 
pardoned if they would: they do not submit, and show 
God that they never intend to yield, and he shows them 
fully what he thinks and feels of such incorrigible wicked- 
ness. 

The universe which is pervaded with God is filled with 
his thoughts and emotions as pure, spiritual, immortal fire. 
Omnipresence is a boundless deep of consuming intensity, 
a fire to goodness, meekness, and truth, innocuous, and 
genial as the summer sunshine. But in it the remorse 
and hatred of their defeated malice and detected villany 
kindle and burn with sulphurous flames forever. The fire 
is the fire of the Divine holiness. The brimstone is the 
brimstone of their malignant passions. 

And what, then, has it profited them to gain what they 
did gain of earth for a few fleeting years, and lose all 
these things for ever and ever? 

They have realized that final extinction of spiritual life, 
and possibility of amendment, which is called death, the 
second death, eternal death. They are dead to goodness 
and to God forever. 

They have gained the lively and undying abhorrence 
of the ever-growing universe. Their history will be ever 
new. The scenes of the rebellion will be ever vivid in 



318 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the view of all ages. The smoke of that final storm of 
wrath by which its organized power was finally crushed 
shall forever ascend up before the eyes of back-looking 
generations. And as race after race rises into being, and 
of the increase of God's government there is no end, so the 
tide of public abhorrence against ingratitude so monstrous, 
falsehood so black, cruelty so unnatural, rebellion so unrea- 
sonable, and persisted in so freely and gratuitously forever, 
will be ever deep and fresh and strong. 

How foolish, then, how wrong, how needless, to live an 
impenitent life, and die eternally ! There is nothing to 
prevent a man's repenting of sin now, believing in Christ 
now, embracing his service now, loving him now, being 
taught and cared for by him now. On the contrary, mo- 
tives are strong, and the strivings of the Spirit powerful. 
Men have to resist. They have to do violence to them- 
selves, and despite to the Spirit of grace. 

If a man develops now a power of resisting truth and 
motive, and the Spirit of God, and nullifying the whole 
redemptive economy, and forms the habit of it, he can keep 
on so to all eternity. Men think it improbable they will. 
But why ? Is it not probable they will do what they are 
doing ? Does it seem incredible you should hold out for- 
ever and be miserable forever ? Why, then, do you hold 
out now ? If you can hold out against God in the focus of 
a redemptive system, you can much more in a system not 
redemptive. When you pass from this world, you pass from 
a redemptive to a non-redemptive system. If you now 
habitually resist God, you will much more resist him then. 
You are sealing your own destiny. You are deciding your 
own fate. You are selling your birthright. You are not 
gaining the whole world, and you are losing yourself. 

O, answer me the question, or answer it to the Spirit that 
strives with you, What shall it profit you, if you gam the 
whole world and lose yourself, or be cast away ? 



CHAPTER XXIV. 

THE WORLD CONVINCED. 

" He shall convince the world of judgment, because the prince of 
this world is judged." — John xvi. 11. 

FROM these words, it is plain that there is to be a day 
when the world will be convinced of judgment, and 
when the public sentiment of the world will be on the side 
of the Dmne government in the controversy with rebellion, 
so as to sustain it in inflicting the penalties of treason. 

It is the work of the Holy Spirit to bring in that day, by 
disclosing the truth with regard to the chief of the revolt, 
author and mainspring of rebellion from first to last, so that 
the public sentiment of this world shall entertain a correct 
judgment of him, and of the rebellion in him. 

That day will usher in the millennium. Whenever the 
world is convinced of judgment because the prince of this 
world is judged, Satan is logically bound as with a great 
chain, and shut up as in a deep abyss, and a seal set upon 
him to deceive the nations no more. 

As that day approaches, we may expect that the question 
of eternal judgment will be more and more interesting. It 
will be more and more prominently discussed. All that 
can be said on both sides of the question will be said. And 
after a thorough examination the mind of the world will be 
convinced and at rest. 

It is not strange, then, that there should be, at the 
present day, a strong reaction against the doctrine. It is 
natural there should be. It is the inevitable accompani- 
ment of the Spirit's work. * 



320 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

The reaction is not caused merely by constitutional or 
experimental peculiarities. 

It is not the naturally benevolent and compassionate, nor 
yet the irreligious exclusively, who reject eternal judgment, 
and the selfish and unfeeling, or the devout, who maintain 
it. The reaction is felt more or less by all of all classes 
and temperaments. It is not a mere matter of experience 
or of disposition. It lies deeper. It is more universal. It 
is a characteristic of the age. It springs out of causes too 
profound to be traced to individual peculiarities. 

Nor is the cause to be sought in denominational pecu- 
liarities, Calvinistic or Arminian, old school or new, evan- 
gelical or unevangelical. 

The causes, so far as they pertain to doctrine, are com- 
mon to all. They lie in the common belief of Christendom, 
evangelical and unevangelical alike. 

Romish masses are dead, and do not think enough to be- 
lieve or disbelieve intelligently on this or any other subject. 
But wherever Protestantism has awakened the intellect of 
the nations to life, there, under all forms of church govern- 
ment, under all creeds, this tendency develops itself with 
about equal force. The history of New England furnishes 
a striking illustration of this. Here the theology of the 
Reformers in its strictest form had the ground in advance, 
and laid the foundations of society to suit itself, and reigned 
supreme for more than a century. 

But it did not escape the tendencies of which we are 
speaking. The first Universalists in New England were 
Calvinists. Their arguments were all drawn from the Cal- 
vinistic system. To meet them arose the New Divinity. 
Universalism and New Divinity are twins. But though 
they struggled together in the womb, Jacob has never been 
able to drive out Esau. 

The New Divinity met the arguments from Old Calvin- 
ism, but the Universalists found others in the common sys- 



THE WOELD CONVINCED. 321 

tem of Christendom as good, and went on Increasing in 
numbers and strength. 

The demonstration from history is perfect, that the ten- 
dencies to deny eternal judgment are not peculiar to any 
of the denominations of Christendom, but spring out of 
elements common to them all, — elements of unsuspected 
power, on Avhich Catholic and Protestant, Calvinist and 
Arminian, evangelical and unevangelical, stand together, 
and make common cause. Our text shows us where to 
look for these elements, namely, in connection with the 
character and history of the prince of this world. 

The first element is, the idea that the origin of evil is 
a subject that cannot be understood and ought not to be 
discussed. 

Now the origin of evil is simply the rebellion of Lucifer, 
and to say that the origin of evil is to be let alone is to say 
that the origin of Lucifer's rebellion is to be let alone, and 
that the real issue between the government and the rebel- 
lion cannot be understood. But if the issue between the 
government and the rebellion cannot be understood, how 
can it be intelligently perceived which is right? And 
without being intelligently convinced that the government 
is in the right, how can the government be sustained in the 
execution of penalty? 

What would be the effect in our country if all parties 
should agree that the origin of secession and rebellion was 
an inscrutable mystery ? Would not that cut the nerves of 
war, and paralyze government in dealing with rebels ? Is 
not the origin of secession the precise thing, above all others, 
that it is important there should be no doubt about ? Do 
not the enemies of the administration always try to cover 
it up in a fog, and the friends of the administration try 
to pour sunlight upon it? And is it not the same in the 
Divine campaign against rebellion ? If the origin of revolt 
be covered up, will it not render it impossible for minds to 
14* u 



322 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

sympathize with the Divine government in the execution 
of the penalties of treason ? 

Eternal penalties for what? Eternal penalties for an 
utterly unintelligible thing ? Eternal penalties for an issue 
we must not attempt to understand ? Eternal penalties for 
that which must be to our minds a virtual nonentity, so far 
as any intelligent appreciation of guilt is concerned ? Yet 
this is the logical result of the principle that the origin of 
evil is to be carefully ignored. The denial of eternal pen- 
alty is the natural consequence. And are not all parties, 
evangelical and unevangelical, a unit here ? And does not 
this account for the tendencies of the age ? 

The next element is a kind of dualistic conception of 
Satan as a being essentially and necessarily evil. 

It was anciently believed that there were two self- 
existent and eternal natures, one good, the other evil, and 
that from the conflict between these all the mixture of good 
and evil now apparent has arisen. This belief appears in 
ancient Egypt, Chaldea, Persia, and the East, and in the 
Gnostic and Manichean heresies of the early centuries. 
Outside of Christendom it still may be reckoned among 
the active elements of human speculation. And even in- 
side, though nominally condemned, it doubtless exercises an 
indirect and unsuspected influence. Probably multitudes 
unconsciously conceive of the evil one as essentially and ne- 
cessarily, and not voluntarily evil, in a manner but slightly 
differing from the ancient notion of an eternal evil principle. 

Now, in so far as such ideas or any approaching them 
lurk in the mind of man, they logically weaken conviction 
of Lucifer's guilt and exposure to just punishment. If he 
has a necessarily evil nature, it is difficult to blame him for 
acting according to it. It is impossible to blame him as we 
should if his nature was originally pure. It is the idea of 
his having violated his own nature, and corrupted it, that 
alone can make us feel that he is really to blame. 



THE WORLD CONVINCED. 323 

The very nature of sin, its definition, implies change, pas- 
sage from good to evil, transgression, crossing over, violation 
of previous right relations. A pure nature must first exist, 
or a sinful nature cannot exist. Holiness must be first, or 
sin cannot be. That which is called sin is not blameworthy 
unless it was preceded by holiness. 

It is often said that perfectly holy creatures cannot sin. 
The exact opposite is true. Only holy creatures can sin. 
For if a creature sin, with an original nature that way, 
sin is no longer sinful, that is, there is no blame in it. 
Blame always implies a violation of one's nature, and that 
nature good. Hence if the prince of this world was evil 
from eternity, or created evil, he does not deserve to be 
blamed or punished. It is the fact that he was created 
pure, and was first positively holy, that clothes all his sub- 
sequent conduct with blameworthiness, and makes him 
really deserving of death. 

The next cause of the tendencies in question, common 
to all, is either a denial of the existence of Satan, or such a 
representation of him as amounts nearly to the same thing. 
All unevangelical denominations deny the existence of the 
Devil. Rome describes him in such a gross, material way 
as tends to utter contempt and scepticism. Protestant 
conceptions are but little better. The ideas associated with 
him in the popular mind are, for the most part, material, 
magical, and absurd. The conception of him as the leader 
of a vast rebellion, a being of profound knowledge and con- 
summate abilities, whose power is logical and philosophical, 
presiding over the civil and ecclesiastical systems of the 
world, is rarely entertained. His position as the great 
adversary of Christ, and master spirit of the political and 
religious campaigns of time, is little thought of. His his- 
tory, character, organizing power, the principles of his 
kingdom, and his relations to Christ, and the mode by 
which he is to be bound, are little studied. 



324 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Practically, evangelical theology ignores him about as 
much as unevangelical. Thus, in the Confession of Faith 
and Catechisms of the Westminster Assembly, if you turn 
to the index of subjects, you do not find his name men- 
tioned at all. If you search the book through, you will find 
some ten or twelve instances where his name occurs, or 
where he is alluded to, but in the most cursory manner. 
His history is nowhere given in full. His relations to Christ 
and Christ's to him, as leaders of the opposite armies of 
loyalty and of rebellion, are nowhere stated. So that 
practically it is not far from the truth to say, that he is a 
mere cipher in the book. 

Now, suppose the history of the United States from 
1776 to 1876 to be written by some future historian, and 
in the general index of subjects the word slavery should 
not be found, and in the body of the work the existence 
of that institution should be only a few times casually and 
incidentally alluded to. Could such a work give to future 
readers any adequate impression of the government policy 
during this tremendous war, and enable them to sympathize 
with our struggles to suppress rebellion? 

How, then, is it possible that a system of theology that 
writes the history of the universe from eternity to eternity, 
as the Confession of Faith does, with the name of Satan 
left out of the table of contents, can possibly initiate us 
into the councils of the Divine administration in the war 
of ages ? How can it possibly make us sympathize in the 
final execution of the penalties of treason, when the Devil 
is cast into the lake of fire forever ? And how can there 
but be a reaction from eternal penalties of a treason the 
whole history of which, in the prime contriver and master 
mind throughout, is practically concealed? 

In ignoring the true history of Satan, and thrusting him 
into the background, the evangelical denominations are 
nearly a unit with the unevangelical, and but little less 



THE WOELD CONVINCED. 325 

responsible than they for the reaction from eternal judg- 
ment. 

A fourth element of the popular belief, inconsistent with 
a conviction of eternal judgment, is the idea that Lucifer 
is infernal. 

The imagination of Christendom locates the head-quar- 
ters of the prince of this world in the world below, the 
world of punishment. There he is popularly regarded as 
occupied in tormenting the lost, in various ways, and sally- 
ing forth upon earth in quest of new victims. The 
bearing of such a conception on the question of future 
retribution is easily illustrated. 

Let it be supposed that the existing rebellion in our land 
were suppressed, and its chief tried, convicted, and sen- 
tenced to imprisonment for life in some government fortress 
or place of strength. Let it then be imagined that the 
government should allow him to correspond with friends in 
all parts of the country ; to go and come at pleasure ; to 
levy war, organize armies, and carry on military operations 
against the government, still using the government fortress 
as his head-quarters ; — conceding to him the title of Pres- 
ident of the Confederacy, allowing him a free pass within 
the lines, to go out and come in at pleasure, while at the 
same time making war against him in all the revolted States. 
Is it possible that the inhabitants of those States, and the 
soldiers of those rebel armies, could, under those circum- 
stances, be made to feel that their disloyalty to government 
was either criminal or dangerous ? " We can carry on 
war," they might say, " with perfect safety. If we over- 
throw the government, well and good. If we are de- 
feated, the government will provide us a fortress, and give 
us unlimited range, as it does our chief. 

So the world may reason and does reason in regard to 
the government of God. The great majority feel that 
the Divine government is responsible for the existence of 



326 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

rebellion here on earth, and is hound in honor to pardon 
all concerned. And why do they feel so ? Because they 
are taught to believe that, one rebellion being crushed, 
and its leader punished, God allowed him to go out of 
his prison and get up another. A condemned and incar- 
cerated traitor was allowed free passage from his prison to 
this world, with full knowledge that he would organize a 
revolt of ages. 

The argument from such a conception against eternal 
punishment is direct, pointed, and of almost infinite 
power. The human mind so feels it, and acts accord- 
ingly. 

A fifth element, antagonistic to conviction of eternal 
judgment, is the belief that the fall of Lucifer was neces- 
sitated by Divine decree. 

The impression has been made on the popular mind 
quite extensively that God intended that Lucifer should 
fall, arranged causes with reference to it, and decreed 
it unchangeably from all eternity. However Lucifer 
might be a free agent, the circumstances, it is commonly 
thought, were so contrived that it was morally neces- 
sary that he should choose wrong. The motives were so 
arranged on purpose. They were so strong, that, though 
there might be a bare natural possibility of his standing, 
there was a moral impossibility. 

Now this impression, that sin entered the universe by 
Divine decree, or designed permission, is directly in the 
way of convincing the world of judgment. It is so logi- 
cally, and it is so used in fact. Logically it follows, that, 
if the Divine government wanted to have a rebellion, 
planned it, adapted motives with infinite skill to produce 
it, then it is responsible for it. The government is the 
real getter up of the rebellion, and Lucifer is but the 
instrument of the governmental policy. 

But if so, — the inference is fair, — the government 



THE WORLD CONVINCED. 327 

ought, sooner or later, to restore all rebels to loyalty. As 
it planned and contrived their fall, adapting motives to 
that end, which they could not, or certainly would not, 
resist, so it is bound as a benevolent government ulti- 
mately to adapt motives the other way, and extricate all 
unfortunate creatures from the predicament in which it 
contrived to place them. 

This reasoning is sound. It will stand the test of the 
judgment-day. And the human mind actually so accepts 
it, and makes it one ground of its delusive belief of 
universal salvation. 

But the premises are false. God decrees the existence 
of moral agents, foreknows their actions, and decrees his 
own. He does not foreknow their actions because he first 
determines them and makes them inevitable. He fore- 
knows because he is omniscient, and can pass over, as it 
were, all chains of causes, and alight anywhere, on any 
particular fact or act, and see it independently of its 
causes. He is not dependent for his knowledge of the 
future on a chain of reasoning. All things are open and 
naked. He sees the things that are not as if they were. 

If God really decreed, and by his will determined the 
acts of creatures, those creatures would be capable of 
neither praise nor blame. Their actions would not be 
theirs, but his, and to him would belong the praise or 
blame of them. The idea that God predetermines the 
actions of his creatures, differs but little from Pantheism, 
by making the will of God the only active will in the 
universe. 

Now that God had a plan is certain. That his plan in 
some sense was comprehensive of all events is certain ; 
and that he decreed all events which could be decreed 
without destroying responsibility, and making himself re- 
sponsible for sin, is also plain, and is all that the Confession 
of Faith by strict construction teaches. After saying that 



328 BEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

God did ordain whatsoever comes to pass, it adds, " Yet 
so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is 
violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the 
liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but 
rather established." That means, that God did not in any 
proper sense decree sin. He decreed all things except sin, 
in all its forms. That is Calvinism, and that is common 
sense. 

When God created Lucifer and the angels, he created 
them on the best possible model. There is such a thing, 
abstractly considered, as the best way of making a mind. 
God knew what that ideal way was, and chose it because 
it was best. It was essentially right to create minds on 
the best conceivable pattern, as the Confession says he did. 
" God created all angels spirits, immortal, holy, excelling 
in knowledge, mighty in power, to execute his command- 
ments, and to praise his name, yet subject to change." 

He did not make them to sin, not one of them, but " to 
execute his commandments and to praise his name." 

Moreover, as in individual minds, so in a public mind, 
or society or body politic. There are certain forms of 
social order which are intrinsically best. God chose those 
because they were best, independently of whether they 
would be abused or not. He chose them because it was 
right to organize society on the best possible principles and 
in the best possible forms and systems, and throw the 
responsibility of maintaining them on the community so 
constituted. 

Hence, as sin has entered in fact, it entered as a thing 
foreseen, but not directly decreed. God decreed the best 
system, with that possibility in it, because without that pos- 
sibility it would not be the best, because not free. He 
decreed the system with the foresight of the fact of sin, 
but in spite of that foresight, not on account of it. He de- 
creed the best possible scheme of powers and organization, 



THE WORLD CONVINCED. 829 

in spite of the painful foresight of sin, because it was right 
to do what was intrinsically the best. 

To say, then, that God permitted sin, is like saying that 
a machinist permits friction in his steam-engine. To say 
God decreed the fall of Lucifer, is like saying that the 
founders of this republic decreed the revolt of the South ; 
a scarcely parallel case, for though their system was a noble 
one, it had great faults out of which the secession grew, 
while the system God adopted had no faults, and the revolt 



of Lucifer grew out of nothing, but was a self-born monster. 

The doctrine of decrees, then, is simply the doctrine of 
divine self-denial. God determined to do what he saw to 
be right and best in itself, though he saw that he should 
in fact be rebelled against, unthankfully treated, abused, 
slandered, and subjected to profound moral suffering for 
ages. He determined to do right, notwithstanding. And 
that is simple self-denial. The decrees of God are nothing 
but his determination from all eternity to do exactly right, 
and suffer for it all he has suffered, and is suffering, by 
the uncaused, unprovoked, ungrateful, unutterably wicked 
rebellion of the objects of his love. 

Another element closely connected with the last is the 
belief that Lucifer was unmercifully treated. 

We refer to the common impression, that when he sinned 
he was immediately punished, without any chance for 
repentance. The common impression with respect to Lu- 
cifer appears to be that he was fated to fall, and subjected 
to temptation practically irresistible, and that his punish- 
ment was immediate upon the first offence, without the 
chance of repentance. 

Now if these things are true, they constitute what may 
properly be called unmerciful treatment. What mind can 
help feeling it? Hence, just so far as this conception is 
entertained, the doctrine of eternal judgment is felt to be 
an unmerciful doctrine from the very foundation. For if 



330 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

the doom of the Son of the Morning is felt to be unmer- 
ciful at the very outset, then for mankind to be involved 
in that doom will also be felt to be unmerciful, and the 
tendency to deny eternal judgment is inevitable as gravi- 
tation. 

A further element of the general belief inimical to 
conviction of judgment to come is the conception in which 
all sects agree, that this material system is, on the whole, 
defiling to the soul. This idea is less manifestly con- 
nected with the character and history of the prince of this 
world, but no less really. 

However evangelical and unevangelical systems differ in 
details, they all agree substantially in this, that the mate- 
rial system, including the laws of hereditary descent, is 
adapted to produce sin. That evangelical theories imply 
this need not be proved ; it is not denied. Will it be said 
that unevangelical theories do not ? Why, then, the idea 
held by some, that sin dies with the body, and the soul goes 
out free ? All the sin there is is from the body, according 
to that class of thinkers. And why do another class place 
their hopes of restoration in progressive spheres after 
death ? Why not be holy here ? Is it not evident that 
they feel, whatever their theory may be, that this world 
is depraving, — that immaculate spirits come here to be 
soiled and spotted ; that it is in vain here to sigh for purity ; 
that we must die and get into a less defiling system ? 

The idea, then, that this material system is defiling is 
the common belief of Christendom. In that belief evan- 
gelical and unevangelical denominations are a unit. They 
think alike and reason alike. They make common cause 
against the Scripture doctrine that the material system is 
not defiling but purifying, mediatorial, remedial. 

And what is the logical effect of this state of things ? Is it 
not to create the impression that sin is our misfortune, not 
our crime, — that the Divine government brought it upon 



THE WORLD CONVINCED. 331 

us, and is therefore bound to remove it ? Can that feeling 
be resisted? Is it not a just and proper feeling, provided 
the theory on which it rests be true in fact ? If this is 
a divinely contrived sin-producing machine, of irresistible 
contaminating power, the Divine government is respon- 
sible. It must remove that which it has itself occasioned. 
The reaction from eternal judgment, from this source, is 
resistless and universal as the attraction of gravity or the 
motion of the spheres. 

Still another element is the idea that sin occasions no 
feeling in the Divine mind of a painful cast, none that is 
disagreeable, none that partakes of the nature of suffering. 

God is incapable of any feeling which is in the least 
^egree painful or disagreeable, or the opposite of pleasura- 
ble. He cannot feel any real sorrow ; he cannot feel any 
real grief, at least, not so far as sorrow and grief are painful 
emotions. He can feel sorrow and grief that have not the 
least degree of pain in them, but no other. 

Now what is the logical result of this philosophy ? What 
bearing must it have on the question of the treatment 
due to sin, — the final treatment of rebels by the Divine 
government ? 

Was the revolt of Lucifer at all unpleasant to God ? No, 
it was as pleasant — he was just as free from pain, just as 
happy in it, as he would have been had Lucifer remained 
loyal. And when myriads of bright angels followed Luci- 
fer, and organized a kingdom of lies and murder, was not 
that disquieting to God ? Did it not awaken some emo- 
tions of regret, — something that might be said to be of a 
painful cast of feeling ? No ; not in the least. The organ- 
ization of a vast and deadly rebellion, that was for ages to 
fill the universe with, groans and blood, excited in the 
Divine breast emotions as free from pain of any kind as 
their continued loyalty would have done. True, he is 
nominally displeased and offended and angry ; but it is an 



332 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

anger and a displeasure that is in no sense painful or differ- 
ent from pleasurable. 

And when man fell, and human history unrolled, as it has, 
a history of sin, sorrow, unutterable guilt, and unutterable 
affliction, age after age, did God contemplate that with- 
out any emotion of the nature of sorrow and grief? Does 
all the combined shi and sorrow of all rebel angels and men 
come up before his mind, and does he not in any painful 
sense grieve over it? 

No, we are told. He uses such language for effect, but it 
means nothing. He is as really free from the least element 
of a painful cast, as absolutely undisturbed in his enjoyment 
of the spectacle, as he would have been if all angels and 
all men were adoring and praising together round his 
throne ! 

How can the intelligent mind but revolt from the idea of 
eternal judgment, — eternal judgment upon a thing in no 
degree disagreeable to God, eternal judgment upon a rebel- 
lion in which, from beginning to end, the government took 
as much pleasure as it would have taken in loyalty ? 

Does it tend to produce sympathy with the Divine gov- 
ernment on the part of its subjects to tell them it makes no 
difference in God's feelings of pleasure or pain whether 
you love or hate, obey or disobey ; — it never has made any 
difference, and it never will ; — God will feel as much joy 
in the endless sin and sorrow of incorrigible rebels as in the 
purity and glory of the redeemed? 

The tendency of this is almost infinite to prevent the 
possibility of conviction of sin, to cast odium on the Divine 
government, and to cause a universal reaction against the 
doctrine of eternal judgment in all its forms. 

To these causes of reaction must be added the instinctive 
working of rebel mind in a rebel world. 

A rebellion exists, and all mankind are involved in it. 
Christians are indeed extricated from it, and restored to 



THE WORLD CONVINCED. 833 

loyalty, essentially, but they are surrounded by it, and not 
yet wholly divested of habits of thought, feeling, and action 
formed under it, and are more or less susceptible to its pub- 
lic sentiment. Now, when was a rebellion ever known to 
cherish feelings favorable to the strict execution of law upon 
treason ? The instinctive workings of rebel mind, deep, 
latent, unconscious, incessant, mighty, are all toward self- 
exculpation, the crimination of the Divine government, and 
the denial of his right to doom traitors to the second death. 

But all these causes are enhanced and skilfully wielded 
by the presiding intellect of the rebellion. 

As the rebellion in this land has a presiding intellect of 
great power, that wields all the resources of the revolted 
States with consummate ability, so in the great rebellion 
against God there is a presiding intelligence of great power 
that wields all the resources of visible and invisible revolted 
orders, according to a connected plan, with astonishing 
power. 

He knows full well that the next step in the Divine cam- 
paign is to be his dislodge ment from control of public senti- 
ment in this world for a thousand years, — a development 
entirely distinct from his final and eternal doom, a develop- 
ment to be brought about by the Holy Spirit, convincing 
the world of judgment. Against that result he energizes 
with all his power, taking advantage of all such elements 
of the common belief of Christendom as serve his purpose, 
and using them to form a deceived public sentiment, and 
set it flowing in wrong channels. 

It is this cause in which all other causes combine and 
reach their height. It is the rebellion in its chiefs, in its 
master minds, in its presiding intelligence, energizing to 
prevent the Holy Spirit from convincing the world of sin, of 
justification through Christ alone, and of eternal judgment. 

From all these causes combined, it is not surprising that 
there is a wide-spread antipathy against eternal judgment, 



334 EEDEEMER AND EEDEEMED. 

and a growing hostility to the inspiration of that book that 
teaches it. The wonder is, that, with the rebel version of 
the controversy generally conceded on the part of the loyal, 
Christianity has been able to survive even in name, and the 
Bible to retain its hold on the public mind as the Word of 
God. So long as the chiefs of the Conspiracy of Ages can 
palm off their fictions for facts, their outrageous impostures 
for authentic history, so long they will deceive the whole 
race into alliance with its hereditary foes and oppressors, 
and into desperate resistance to its hereditary King and 
Redeemer. 

But let the Holy Spirit disclose the Divine version 
of the facts from the beginning, — let Lucifer's history, 
character, principles, and aims be correctly revealed and 
appreciated by mankind, — and the public sentiment of the 
world will veer round. The war will thenceforth be a 
war of races as well as of principles, with a more definite 
knowledge of both. The exiled race of man, under Christ 
its legitimate Head and Redeemer, will become a unit 
against their hereditary tyrants and oppressors, the original 
angelic dynasty of the universe under Lucifer their chief. 
And when the moral sense of the race is sufficiently en- 
lightened to sustain the Divine government in the execution 
of the penalties of treason upon Satan and the fallen angels, 
much more will it be enabled to sustain it in executing 
those penalties upon such of the human race as have de- 
serted from their own standard, gone over to their heredi- 
tary tyrant, and made war against their own Redeemer. 
When the Spirit of God shall have finally convinced the 
world of judgment because the prince of this world is 
judged, when those who have become identified with him 
shall wake from the grave, they will wake to shame and 
everlasting contempt. Nor will one chord of sympathy 
vibrate in their favor, when the voice of Christ is heard say- 
ing unto them, " Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire 
prepared for the Devil and his angels ! " 



CHAPTER XXV. 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 



THESE are the words John hears bursting forth from 
the throne of God, when the seventh vial is poured 
out. 

Let us endeavor to bring before our minds the scene as 
described. Previous vials have affected parts of the 
visible system, — earth, sea, river, sun, throne of beast, 
Euphrates, — this strikes what is more universal, the 
atmosphere. 

From our heavenly stand-point, we look down on the 
earth through the crystal depths of an aerial sea. One 
moment this sea is transparent and serene, bathing the 
wide landscape in amber and gold ; the next, clear round 
the world, it is blazing with lightning, reverberating with 
thunders and mysterious voices, and at the same time the 
entire surface of the globe is seen heaving with earth- 
quake. The ground opens under Babylon, dividing it in 
three parts, which reel and tumble into the yawning chasm. 
All over the expanse cities are seen falling, mountain 
chains everywhere are sinking down, and islands en- 
gulfed in the raging ocean ; and from above, all over the 
world, a great hail-storm is seen descending, every stone 
one hundred pounds weight, crashing through and shatter- 
ing to pieces whatever is exposed to their fury. Those 
who have received the mark of the beast are seen perish- 
ing in great numbers, and in imminent peril, yet impeni- 
tent still, and blaspheming God because of the hail. 



336 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

Such is the vision. What, then, is the import? In 
general, the analogy is as follows. As a change in the 
air such as to shatter the crust of the globe would be to 
all works of man on the surface, so an analogous change 
shall pass upon the atmosphere of human thought, revolu- 
tionizing society from its foundations, and demolishing all 
existing civil and ecclesiastical despotisms. 

Thus viewed, it is the climax of the vials, just after a 
hush of expectation, such as precedes the earthquake. 
Under previous vials, we have seen the age of revolution- 
ary tendencies, popular soreness, revenge, sanguinary 
views, a gradual approach of God raising the moral tem- 
perature to equatorial heat, the reaction of the fundamental 
principles of selfish society to shut off his beams, the drying 
up of sources of spiritual despotism, and a final rally of 
the mind of the race to meet the coming shock. 

And now the voice from the throne says, " It is done." 
The effect, whatever it is, on human thought takes place, 
and the result is a revolution, not of one nation or country, 
but substantially universal, coextensive with the race. It 
is the final crisis in the world's thought. It is the decisive 
stroke in the grand moral war. It ends the campaign. 
God says, " It is done." It is quick, vivid, and accom- 
panied by all the indications of intensely excited and 
explosive emotion, of the highest grade, voices, and thun- 
ders, and lightnings. 

It is, moreover, not a conservative revolution, but a 
destructive one. That is, the crisis is presented, not in 
its conservative aspects, though it has them, but exclusively 
in its destructive. It is ecclesiastical and civil despotism 
that is to be dealt with. It is the cup of the wine of the 
fierceness of God's wrath that is administered. 

Twice before, once under the sixth seal, and again 
under the seventh trumpet, have the visions conducted us 
onward to this same crisis, described with symbols of sub- 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 337 

stantially similar import; and yet, again, in succeeding 
chapters, with more ample detail is the same crisis held 
up. Four times, in separate and independent series, we 
are brought down to this grand crisis, the end of one age, 
the beginning of a new. Or if by the term the world 
we denote all that is selfish and corrupt in society, the 
total of civil and ecclesiastical despotism, then it is the 
end of the world, and introduction of millennial day. 
Thus far all is general and probably undisputed. 

Let us, then, endeavor to attain a somewhat more 
specific conception of this crisis. And we remark, first, 
that there are social structures which cannot be reformed. 
There is in them so much that is false and selfish, that to 
reform would be to destroy them. 

When the Israelites went into Canaan, they found a 
species of leprosy that infected even houses of brick and 
stone. And when, after due cleansing, that plague in the 
walls, with its greenish or reddish streaks, was pronounced 
by the priest incurable, the house had to be torn down, 
and the stones, timber, and mortar carried out of the city 
to an unclean place. So there are houses built by vio- 
lence, and cemented by blood, in whose very stones and 
mortar lurks the plague of falsehood and selfishness so 
deeply that there is no cure but demolition and disinte- 
gration. 

This principle was illustrated in some degree at the 
deluge, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and 
siege of Jerusalem, which are all used by the Spirit as 
specimens or types of this last crisis under the seventh 
vial. 

How can the caste system of India ever be reformed ? 
How can pagan civil and religious society ever be reor- 
ganized without first being taken wholly to pieces ? The 
plague is in the very walls, and in every stone, and the 
cement is saturated. So with such a system as the Papacy. 
15 v 



66o EEDEEMER AND EEDEEMED. 

What reform is even conceivable which must not amount 
to a total disintegration ? So with the immense civil des- 
potisms of Europe. Reform them, according to the Divine 
idea of truth and goodness, what would be left? 

So with commerce. Suppose business, suddenly re- 
formed on the basis of the golden rule, would not the 
property of the globe change hands ? Would not some 
lucrative branches utterly disappear? Would not what 
was left unmodified be a part here, a part there ? In 
short, would not the great commercial Vanity Fair be laid 
in heaps? 

It needs no particular keenness of vision to see that 
the world, is built over with structures that cannot be 
reformed but by a previous process of dissolution and 
disorganization. And it is this, on the great scale, that is 
pictured in the vision. Babylon can never be patched up 
and mended into the New Jerusalem. It must be de- 
molished, and the New Jerusalem take its place. 

Now the atmosphere of thought of these systems is the 
same in all ages and countries, just as the natural air is 
the same to all nations, in all parts of the earth. These 
systems stand in the atmosphere of selfish and corrupt 
human thought, as spires and turrets in the air of heaven. 
And in this thought-atmosphere Lucifer finds his con- 
genial home, his intrenched fortress. Hence, Eph. ii. 2, 
he is called the prince of the power of the air, energizing in 
the hearts of the children of disobedience, and the course 
of this world, or this age, is said to flow according to him. 
All who commit sin are of him, his servants, his goods, his 
subjects, in his kingdom. Paul calls him " the god of 
this world," and names him, with his confederates, cosmoc- 
racy, or world-government. 

Now it is Lucifer and his associates, thus at home in the 
atmosphere of human thought, who are the real architects 
of those structures of which we have just spoken, that can- 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 339 

not be reformed without being destroyed, — such as the 
papacy and civil despotisms. No one mind or generation 
builds them. They are the slow growth of centuries, and 
yet they exhibit marks of design and contrivance, as much 
as a watch or a world. And the designer was one who lived 
on while generations rose and fell, worked by a plan of 
his own, subtly philosophical, but evil, seizing hold of all 
advantages as they rose, and using men as his materials. 

This is shadowed by the Dragon giving throne and 
power and authority to the Beast. That is, unseen 
satanic agents giving intellectual and moral sway to civil 
despotism. They speak through the false prophet, that is, 
make worldly ministers their special mouth-piece in found- 
ing ecclesiastical despotisms. By means of these organ- 
izations Lucifer fortifies himself in the control of society, 
and intrenches himself against all attempts to dislodge 
him. 

This of course implies that he knows a movement is on 
foot to dislodge him. He knows it, although he does his best 
to conceal it from public attention. He knows that, since 
Eden, God has threatened to bruise the serpent's head. He 
knows, since Christ's resurrection, the terrible power of his 
attack, which has already hemmed him in upon this Water- 
loo world. And, as the emblems evidently show, he fore- 
sees the decisive battle, and makes desperate efforts to rally 
his forces and hold his ground in the intellectual, scientific, 
political, and religious atmosphere of the world. 

It is easy, then, to see what change in the atmosphere of 
human thought is meant, in consequence of which all selfish 
structures are demolished. 

It is, that God should reveal fully in the sphere of human 
thought the facts in regard to Satan, and the Divine judg- 
ment, and emotions on those facts. This involves certainty 
as to the existence and agency of Satan. There is to be a 
revelation of Satan, as well as a revelation of God, and one 



340 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

in order to the other. God cannot reveal his righteous 
judgment concerning the whole kingdom of Satan without 
first revealing the fact of Satan's existence, and the main 
facts of his history. 

" Then," says Paul, " shall that lawless one be revealed." 
And so vivid is that revelation to be, that some have even 
taken the impression that it was to be an actual incarnation. 

At least, Satan will stand forth to human thought with 
as great a reality as incarnation could give him, and the 
main facts of his career will be correctly revealed to human 
intelligence, and the emotions of God on the same brought 
home to human consciousness. 

This revelation of the righteous judgment of God could 
not be made till the preparations for it were complete. It 
was necessary that multitudes should be redeemed against 
majorities. It was necessary Christ should prove the gen- 
uineness of his people's repentance by securing it under 
circumstances the most disadvantageous. It was necessary 
Lucifer should be unable to say he had not had a fair 
chance to test the sincerity of their return to loyalty. It 
was necessary that he should have time and scope and 
majorities, and that he should fortify and entrench himself 
by organizations to the utmost. It was necessary that there 
should be a long-continued and most wonderful forbearance 
on the part of God, a suspension of the full expression of 
his infinite ideas and emotions, as he says in the fiftieth 
Psalm, " These things hast thou done, and I kept silence." 

Nevertheless, from the beginning of the world there have 
been intimations of a day when this reserve would end. 
The prophets all look forward to it in connection with vari- 
ous crises of providential judgments, e. g. on Sodom, Baby- 
lon, and Jerusalem, which they use as specimens or types. 
It is called " that day," " the day of the Lord," " the day 
of God," " the day," " day of the revelation of the right- 
eous judgment of God," " day of his redeemed," " day of 
vengeance," " day of wrath," and the like. 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 341 

Then great Babylon comes in remembrance before God, 
to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of 
his wrath. Before, it seemed as if God had forgotten. 
He acted, to human view, as if he had. He gave no full 
and unequivocal utterance to his emotions. Now such 
self-restraint ceases ; now he acts as if he had just re- 
membered, that is, he gives full expression, in the sphere 
of human thought, to his views and feelings concerning 
Babylon. 

Let us endeavor, then, to conceive of this revelation and 
its effects. Let us suppose each individual of the human 
race to have no more doubt of Lucifer's existence than of 
his own. Let us suppose all rebel lies swept away, and 
the Divine version of his history seen by each eye as clear 
as day. 

God made Lucifer noble and nobly endowed. He gave 
him a high and responsible position. He asked of him 
nothing unreasonable. All he wished was, that he should 
administer the trust confided to him in a spirit of meekness 
and devotion to the general welfare and the glory of God. 
But Lucifer abode not in the truth. In the exercise of his 
own autocracy of free will he created a new kingdom of 
lies and selfishness, which is virtual murder. 

When aberration first commenced, God was not abrupt 
and impatient. He exhibited the same forbearance and 
long-suffering that he now exhibits to all sinners. He used 
all means consistent with self-respect to prevent a final rup- 
ture, and those results of disorganization and conflict which 
must ensue. It was in vain. Lucifer persisted in his un- 
reasonable course, and changed the empire intrusted to 
him into a despotism. 

It became necessary to displace him, and those who sym- 
pathized with him, and appoint others to succeed in their 
stead after a due season of probation and preparation for the 
change. That season of preparation Lucifer employed in 



342 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

corrupting and betraying in the most perfidious manner 
those thus anointed in his room, and securing their expul- 
sion from heaven. 

At this point the mediatorial system arose. A sacrifice 
was appointed, and a Redeemer provided for the banished 
race, and the mighty drama of redemption began to unfold. 

Then come the campaigns of earthly history summed up 
in one sentence, " Enmity between thee and the woman, 
and between thy seed and her seed." Lucifer takes pos- 
session of the atmosphere of human thought from the first. 
He founds collossal empires, Titanic, Egyptian, Assyrian, 
Persian, Roman, Germanic. He arrays these like wild 
beasts against private judgment and liberty of conscience. 
At the same time he corrupts the Church by flattery and 
worldly joys. Thus, by alternate intimidation and seduc- 
tion, he reduces to extremities the few who remain loyal. 

Among these appears the Son of God, a sacrifice for the 
royal order. Lucifer crucifies him, and is himself cast 
down the first stage of descent in consequence. His sway 
over public sentiment of other worlds than this terminated. 
Here his power is intensified. He builds the papacy. He 
intrenches himself by all those organizations to which we 
have referred, in his possession of the atmosphere of human 
thought. He perpetrates the most unheard-of atrocities and 
enormities. He parodies the history of the universe, traves- 
ties the fall, burlesques the atonement, slanders God, throws 
the blame of the revolt and of sin on him, paints him in 
diabolic colors, puts his own false and malignant character 
into the theological temple and calls it God, dresses up a 
filthy harlot, drunk with blood, and calls her bride of God, 
object of his special affection. 

Thus, for centuries, he exhausts the possibilities of lan- 
guage and action to express his hatred, contempt, and loath- 
ing. He alternately intimidates and debauches the objects 
of his vengeance, because the heirs of glory. In every 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 343 

way lie tries to cajole and deceive them, put them in false 
and ridiculous positions, commit them to the most abomina- 
ble errors, intoxicate them with flatteries, and madden them 
with carnal elixirs, or rend and tear them, and trample 
them mangled in the mire. 

These things he has done, and God has kept silence. 
But he has seen it all. He has felt it all. He has not for- 
gotten one iota of it. And when the proper moment 
comes, he knows how to blaze it out before human thought 
as it is before his own, and reveal to human consciousness 
the full sense of his living indignation. 

And what, then, must be the effect ? It is the instant 
drawing of the lines, — the good, and those who mean to 
be good, on one side, and those who do not mean to repent 
on the other. And this is equivalent to instant disorganiza- 
tion to all mixed systems composed of good and bad. 

The chief strength of Lucifer has lain in the art with 
which he could involve partially sanctified men in corrupt 
movements, and identify them with selfish institutions. 
That is the way the papacy gained and keeps its great 
power. That is the secret of the longevity of slavery. 
That is why civil despotisms bear such a charmed life. It 
is because no human mind possesses adequate discriminative 
power to make head against Lucifer's blending of good and 
evil. It is his amazing skill in employing the conservative 
element of good men in evil systems, that those systems 
are so invulnerable. 

But the instant effect of the full revelation of God's view 
of facts concerning Lucifer would be to draw all good men 
to his side. And this would be like drawing the nails and 
pins and braces out of a vast edifice. It would collapse. 
Or, like suddenly extracting the keystone from every arch 
supporting an immense temple, it would crush down in 
ruins. 

Let this take place, and the lines are drawn, the good all 



344 EEDEEMEB AND REDEEMED. 

on one side, and the bad on the other, and there is instant 
shock of battle. There can then be a fair fight, with noth- 
ing to break the force of Divine logic. There will be no 
bad men on the good side to break the force of example. 
There will be no good men on the bad side to lend respect- 
ability to evil. 

Christians will no more be sundered by mistakes and 
misconceptions, and turn their arms against each other ; no 
more time and strength will be wasted in terrible fratricidal 
combats ; for the Christian fights with desperation when he 
does fight, — he never gives up, never knows when he is 
beaten ; and hence, when Christians turn their weapons 
against each other, the shock of battle is dreadful and the 
conflict inveterate. 

In the mistakes and divisions of Christians in their feuds 
and dire conflicts with each other, one great secret of 
Satan's safety and strength has lain. The moment that 
ceases to be possible, — the moment God's righteous judg- 
ment is so revealed that all who are of God are a unit, — 
that moment the Waterloo battle is joined, the battle of 
the great day of God Almighty. 

Then, indeed, earth quakes. Then there are voices and 
thunders and lightnings. Then logical arguments go crash- 
ing through the gloomy structures of despotism, and the 
hail-stones of Divine wrath sweep away the refuges of lies. 
Then the voice from the throne proclaims, "It is done ! " 
The campaign is closed. The hosts have been fairly ral- 
lied in battle array. The shock of conflict has come. 
The enemy's centre has been broken. The army is annihi- 
lated. The war of ages is over. 

Well is the book whence our subject is chosen called 
Revelation, for it reveals. It casts a revealing radiance, 
clear and strong, on life and all that it contains. 

Not that our interpretation is infallible, or that of any 
man. Mistake must, doubtless, be largely mixed with it, 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 345 

as with everything human. But that, in spite of mistakes, 
there is such an approximation to the Divine idea as to 
throw a flood of light over an otherwise gloomy and chaotic 
world. 

There are many that treat this book as if its name were 
concealment. There are those that ridicule every attempt 
to understand it. One would imagine they thought it 
God's book of puzzles. One would suppose they read the 
benediction at the opening, Blessed be he that despises, and 
they that scorn to hear the words of the prophecy of this 
book. We cannot thank such people. We cannot accept 
their offices as friendly, however well meant. We can 
conceive of nothing more dark and gloomy than this world 
would be without prophecy shining as a light in a dark 
place. A world full of dungeons and bastiles, a world of 
wars and fightings, plagues and pestilences, a Golgotha, a 
valley of the shadow of death ! 

Without the Bible, and especially without the prophetic 
portions, what omens are ours ! To what could we think 
ourselves coming? And before us what could we discover 
but wars and rumors of wars, and trouble such as was not 
since God created man on earth, distress of nations, the sea 
and waves roaring, and men's hearts failing them for fear, 
and for looking for those things that are coming on the 
earth. 

But the Bible, and especially the Book of Revelation, 
pours a flood of light all over the near future. 

It forbids us to expect the final peace without intervening 
revolution and commotion. It puts us on our guard, fore- 
warns and forearms us. It makes us know that there 
is to be an evil day, defends us against delusive expecta- 
tions, and enables us to stand in the evil day, and then 
opens before us an end. 

There is an end. There is a denouement. There is a 
climax. Houses built by iniquity and cemented in Mood. 



346 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

are to be all torn down, and the beams, mortar, and tim- 
bers carried out to an unclean place. Society is to be 
rebuilt, and the New Jerusalem is the ideal. There is to 
be a decisive battle, not eternal guerilla skirmishing. There 
is to be, and that soon, a battle of the great day of God 
Almighty. 

Then the forces of civil and ecclesiastical despotism are 
utterly defeated, routed, crushed, destroyed. The Devil is 
chained, and, for the first time, incarcerated to deceive the 
nations no more for a thousand years. Earth is purified by 
the same logical and moral developments by which heaven 
was purified at the resurrection of Christ. The cosmocracy 
of hostile spirits — the original angelic dynasty — has passed 
away, the air is purged of their baleful and corrupting 
presence. The principles and ideas of Christ are in the 
ascendant, and the influences of his remedial system for 
the first time developed in ideal perfection without being 
alloyed, corrupted, or neutralized. Generation after gen- 
eration of beauteous and healthful children arise under 
institutions wisely and benevolently organized and spirit- 
ually administered. Health, vigor, purity, prevail. Sick- 
ness and death cease to reign. Want is unknown. Science 
is immensely stimulated, and art perfected. The spiritual 
and ideal in man becomes predominant over the material 
and sensuous. Men at length breathe the air of freedom. 
Civil and religious liberty proves a sweet and exalted reality. 
All the more delicate aspirations and sensitive yearnings 
of the soul expand without fear. The roses of the heart 
bloom in a summer that fears no frost. Mortals, grown 
heavenly, welcome to their society bright visitants of higher 
spheres, and the mountain-tops are often flashing with the 
radiance of celestial wings. The kingdoms of this world 
are then become the kingdoms of Christ. Nations are no 
longer bestial and brutal. They learn war no more. They 
are what we have never seen, — humane, just, generous,, 



THE VIAL ON THE AIR. 347 

spiritual. And in that thousand years, the race, as a race 
sitting clothed and in its right mind at Jesus' feet, shall 
be healed of its wounds, purged from its stains, and tri- 
umphantly qualified to resume, under better auspices, and 
carry out to final accomplishment, the interrupted and 
long-suspended plan of union to Christ in the headship of 
universal empire. 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



UNIVERSAL PEAISE. 



" All nations shall come and worship before thee, foe tht judg- 
ments ARE MADE MANIFEST." — Rev. XV. 4. 

A TIME is here brought to view when the thoughts 
of mankind shall have undergone a great change. 
Their attention will be absorbed in God. In Him they 
will perceive qualities more enrapturing than all they had 
ever known. Praise will be the natural result. Even in 
the moment of his fiercest wrath, a sense of holy beauty 
and divine comeliness will take possession of their breast. 
And in the intensity of the general feeling, a spontaneous 
burst of wonder, admiration, and love will fill the sky. In 
reflecting on that worship, we observe, — 

1. It is an intelligent worship, based upon a full knowl- 
edge of the character of God, as revealed in his actions, 
not merely of one side, namely, as of pity revealed in acts 
of mercy, but equally of the other side, of wrath revealed 
in acts of judgment. Indeed, it is the outpouring of those 
vials in which is filled up the wrath of God that constitutes 
the immediate occasion of the outburst. "Great and mar- 
vellous are thy works ! Just and true are thy ways ! Thou 
only art holy ! Thy judgments are made manifest ! " It 
is because of this stupendous vindication of himself that 
all nations are represented as coming and worshipping be- 
fore him. 

Previous to that crisis the Divine indignation has been 
withheld, while His works have been maligned, his ways 
questioned as neither just nor true, his very character 



UNIVERSAL PRAISE. 349 

impeached as not absolutely holy. Usurping powers have 
assumed His place, and mankind have been portrayed, in 
the vivid emblems of the visionary scene, as worshipping a 
wild beast, and receiving the mark of that blasphemous ser- 
vice upon their forehead and their hand, while the few who 
have clung to his true worship have been represented as the 
objects of the fury of the destroyer. As regards the ma- 
jority of the race, the public mind has been obscured and 
the public judgment bewildered by Satanic deceptions. 

As a consequence, worship would become formal. Praise 
would consist in the ascription to God of qualities he ought, 
rather than those he seemed, to possess. Truth, justice, 
and love would of course be nominally ascribed to him, 
while his deeds would appear to the shuddering worshipper 
at variance with those traits. Such, all history shows, has 
been the case with the vast majority of men. Shut up 
under false representations of God, they have been forbid- 
den even to think of calling those representations in ques- 
tion. The very intuitions of their souls have been set 
aside, the eternal principles of right and wrong summarily 
repealed, and they prohibited from judging of the alleged 
courses of the Divine procedure. Supposing them to be 
in reality facts in the Divine administration, and feeling 
a shuddering consciousness of their real injustice, cruelty, 
and falsehood, men have rebuked their own minds. Let 
me not dare, they have said, to question. My reason is 
fallacious. My conscience is invalid. My standard of 
right and wrong is deceptive. The intuitions of my mind, 
however deep, however sacred, however universal to all 
ages, climes, and kindred, are not correct when applied to 
the Infinite. Therefore let me veil the eye, nor dare 
examine my Maker's conduct ; let me bow and adore in 
blind acquiescence. 

Thus, too generally, praise has been obliged to take for 
granted a goodness it could not see, to celebrate as genuine 



350 EEDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

a truth and honor it could not identify. Praise under such 
circumstances, of necessity, became formal and hypocritical. 
The suitor who compliments the rich heiress with charms 
she does not possess flatters, but does not truly praise. The 
inferior who seeks emolument and influence by attribut- 
ing to his superiors unreal virtues, is a sycophantic slave. 
Praise means what it says. Adulation laughs while it in- 
sidiously flatters. Such is the distinction men draw in 
their treatment of each other. Such in principle is the 
distinction God has drawn in their worship of him. Just 
in proportion as God's truth and justice are not seen by 
the mind, just in that proportion does the ascription of 
them to him in solemn words become a lying mockery, 
exciting his deepest displeasure. 

On the other hand, in proportion as his real character is 
discerned, whether in the world of nature or of grace, and 
intelligently adored, just in that proportion is praise a de- 
light, a fragrant incense, before his throne. The husband- 
man in the field, who learns to trace the surpassing skill and 
beauty of an ever-present God, can praise him at the plough. 
The student of history, who sees him benevolently presiding 
over the changes of nations, can adore him in his literary 
toils. Especially as the scheme of redemption is opened, 
and the deep things of God are revealed to us by his spirit, 
may we even now say, " I will praise Thee with joyful lips ; 
I will sing praise unto Thee while I have any being ! " 

How much more, then, in that day of the full revelation 
of his righteous judgment ! No more then shall the blind 
lead the blind, and both fall into the ditch. No more shall 
liars with consciences seared as with a hot iron deceive the 
world. No more shall destroyers destroy, tread down, and 
lay waste the fair heritage of God. On such the vials of his 
wrath will be poured, and that wrath will give rest to the 
mind and heart of his saints. Then when the hail beats 
down the refuges of lies ; then when omnipotent ven- 



UNIVERSAL PRAISE. 351 

geance shows who is to blame, and what God really thinks 
of the despotisms of ages ; then when there is nothing hid 
that is not revealed, nothing covered that does not come 
abroad, when all Satan's lies are detected, and every act of 
God's administration vindicated from aspersion ; then it is 
that the nations, astonished, lift up their souls to God, and 
say, " Thy judgments are made manifest." Then, in a 
manner wholly unprecedented, shall praise become a pub- 
lic institution. Then nations shall be regenerated, a nation 
in a day. Then the whole family of man, of every kindred, 
people, and tongue, shall say, " Thou only art holy ! " 

2. Another characteristic of true praise is joyful fervor. 
This is the natural result of sincerity and intelligent con- 
viction. Insincerity is cold. Sycophantic praise is like 
frost to the heart. The atmosphere of society, where men 
falsely praise each other for interested ends, is wintry and 
bleak. And if from man they transfer the same habits 
to God, — if they address to him what must appear to him 
little better than heartless flattery and unmeaning com- 
pliment, — their praise becomes joyless. An air of cold 
restraint palls their assemblies with gloom. But a meet- 
ing of Christians ought to be, of all places on earth, lively 
and cheerful. A circle of redeemed pilgrims, forgiven, 
bound for heaven, met to speak of the love that ransomed 
them, ought to be a burning focus of light and heat ; and 
so, in proportion as worship becomes genuine, it will be. 
The emotions we are capacitated to feel toward God are 
the deepest in our nature. Where fully developed and 
kindled towards their object, they burn with a vehement 
flame. 

Nor is the object of those feelings inaccessible. In 
Christ they find their object. He is Emmanuel, God with 
us. Those sentiments which would be diffused and lost, if 
we went out after Infinite Spirit, are concentred and con- 
densed upon Jesus. About God, thus winningly embodied, 



352 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

every attraction clusters. Our fears are disarmed, our mis- 
conceptions corrected, our alienation and distrust reconciled 
and obliterated. All Satanic slanders of the blessed God 
are seen to be false ; for if this be He, — if this Jesus be 
very God, — then not one of those hard things he has 
alleged can be true. We look at His whole life : it is a 
chain of benefactions. We regard his teachings : they are 
simple, intelligible, and adapted to the plainest comprehen- 
sions. If these are God's thoughts, then we see how and 
why God's thoughts are not as our thoughts, because they 
are so pure and clear and transparent, while ours are so 
confused and darkened. We contemplate His Spirit : there 
is not a trace of superciliousness ; no pride offends us, no 
haughtiness bears us down ; we detect not the slightest 
flavor of arrogance ; there is no stiffness, no reserve, noth- 
ing said or done for effect ; all is natural, easy, gentle, open, 
affectionate. If this be very God, — if from this flower 
the very aroma of heaven exhales, — then we know with 
absolute certainty that the very different character of God 
which Satanic philosophy has set forth is not true. No 
matter whether we can philosophize about it or not, — 
whether we can in words demonstrate its falsehood, — we 
know it, as we know a counterfeit by the side of a genuine 
work of beauty ; as we know a real fruit of autumn from 
a waxen imitation ; as we know a living, breathing body 
of a dear friend from a ghastly corpse, from whence every 
trace of life's glory is fled. 

Above all, we look at Christ's whole Career of temptation 
and resistance ; of subjection to law and obedience ; of trial 
and endurance ; of atoning sufferings and resurrection ; and 
we say, If this be very God, then we know that all the 
specious impeachments of his goodness are fabrications. 
We know that all acts of fraud ascribed to him are lies ; 
that all acts of injustice represented as his are unreal, 
never done by him ; that all courses of policy, all plans, 



UNIVERSAL PRAISE. 353 

arrangements, providences, constitutions, dispensations, vio- 
lative of simple fairness and affection, are utterly forged and 
fabricated by the Father of lies. We know it as certainly 
as we know the sun when it rises, — as certainly as chil- 
dren know their father when he enters the room, or their 
mother, as she kneels by their bedside to teach them their 
infant prayers. 

And in proportion as the stupendous forgeries and frauds 
of Satan roll off, and drift like the mists of morning before 
the rising sun, in that proportion do our deep fountains of 
honorable feeling begin to be unsealed. If this be God, 
we say, then I am a sinner ; there can be no mistaking that. 
There is no object in concealment, no dishonor in the 
avowal. Nay, if this be the holiness of my God, this 
which I see in Jesus, this most lovely sight my eyes ever 
beheld, — if this be the quality of infinite goodness, why, 
then, it is what I want ; this is the kind of holiness I can 
worship ; and I can with entire freedom and sweet self- 
abandonment say it is something far purer than I possess. 
O yes ! If this be the holiness of the living God, I can 
fall at his feet, and confess that I have been dead in tres- 
passes and sins ; for such a life of exalted goodness I have 
not led ; such matchless magnanimity was never mine, or, 
if it was, I have lost it, and the very memory of it is per- 
ished within me. 

And while thus rejoicing to become as nothing in my 
own esteem, deep fountains of emotion towards this new, 
this wondrous, this blessed Being astonish me by bursting 
forth within. These deep, soft, sweet, yet mysteriously 
strong emotions, — whence come they ? Have I ever felt 
them before ? Nothing earthly that I can remember is 
like them ; and yet they have a strange, indescribable 
familiarity of bliss, as if now, at last, I had come to myself 
again, — now attained a second spiritual childhood, — now 
fallen once more upon the bosom of my earliest friend. 



354 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

When such emotions are dominant in the soul, praise 
is as natural as breathing. Out of the abundance of the 
heart the mouth speaketh. Childhood is loquacious of its 
little toys, youth of its pleasures, manhood of its sterner 
interests. But, ah ! when all idols are discarded for the 
one new-found object of beauty ; when lighter flames are 
quenched in the brightness of this consuming fire, and the 
whole being is surrendered to Him who is chiefest among 
ten thousand and altogether lovely, — then the tongue is 
loosed indeed, and praise becomes the absorbing impulse 
of existence. New forces reveal themselves within ; new 
energies force their way out of deep, imprisoned recesses. 
Men. are no longer barren, coarse, brutal, destitute of ideas, 
bound down, and base. The fountains of the great deep 
are broken up ; floods rise from below. They discover 
the greatness of their own being, the grandeur of their 
own powers ; God, who made them great, has made them 
great again ; God, who placed in them powers and ener- 
gies, in comparison with which a world is dust, has un- 
locked those energies, broken down the prison doors, and 
brought them forth from thraldom ; and they find them- 
selves able to praise God after another sort from what they 
ever supposed. One man fully redeemed of God develops 
the moral energy of a thousand sunk in sin. One shall 
chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight. 
And when, not in one here and another there, such work 
is wrought, but when in each and all ; when the fathers 
and the mothers, the sons and the daughters, when churches 
and communities, shall be seized with the glad surprise, — 
shall feel the august rushing of the mighty wind, — then 
indeed will praise to God be developed on a scale unknown 
before on earth. The world shall be filled with the knowl- 
edge of God as the waters cover the deep. As the mighty 
tides of the emerald sea fill the vast valleys of the Atlantic, 
and bathe the submerged mountains, with all their marine 



UNIVERSAL PRAISE. 355 

forests and secret hiding-places of strange things, so, like 
another ocean, shall the knowledge of God overleap the 
mountain-tops of society, fill every vale and dark recess, 
submerge the mountains, with all their waving pride, and 
dash with sparkling crests of fire against the sky. Of all 
the millions that people the globe, not one will hide from 
the face of God in Christ, not one wish to be excused, but 
all, from least to greatest, unite in saying, " Great and mar- 
vellous are thy works, O Lord God Almighty ! just and 
true are thy ways, thou King of saints ! Thou only art 
holy ! thy judgments are made manifest ! " 

In the light of this discussion we may discover why our 
worship of God is so faint and low. The real character of 
God, his real acts, are so glorious, that, if we do not tend 
strongly to praise, it is certain that they are hid from us. 
Either sin hides them, — a fixed, inveterate indulgence in 
known sin, by which we shut our eye on God, and will not 
see him, — or else some mistake of our own, or some contri- 
vance of the enemy, has shut him out from the view. One 
or both, usually both, are true, when praise is not spontane- 
ous and vital. Whatever in our life indisposes us to praise 
God, is sin. Whatever in our belief chills our worship, is 
false. Have you either a practice or a creed which dulls 
the edge of devotion, which you suppose to be true, but 
which yet always depresses you, and fills you with apa- 
thetic gloom, then such practice is sinful and such creed a 
delusion ! By their fruits ye shall know them. It is not 
the life of God nor the truth of God. It is part of that 
dark cloud of forgery and lies with which Satan has de- 
ceived the nations. 

We discover, moreover, the true method of perfecting 
praise. We are to perfect knowledge. We are to grow in 
the knowledge of God. Taking Jesus as the beginning 
and end, we are to found the whole system of our thoughts 
upon him. If we would study nature, and the chain of 



856 REDEEMER AND REDEEMED. 

arts and sciences, we are to study them in the light of the 
Cross. In proportion as we investigate the laws of the 
material system, in this light will every part grow clearer. 
And as one mystery after another is unfolded, — as one dis- 
closure after another of hidden wisdom is effected, — we 
rise to increasing heights of praise. 

So we are to study human history and the great princi- 
ples of revealed religion. So the first principles and the 
higher truths of Christianity. Theology will thus be to us 
an ever advancing path of light. And while we leave the 
things behind, and press on to new discoveries, it will be 
our stimulus, not our discouragement, that we can never 
find out the Almighty unto perfection ; that, while contin- 
ually finding him out in stage after stage of knowledge, 
degree above degree in attainment, we know for our con- 
solation that there is an infinite store of riches beyond, 
which all eternity cannot impoverish nor exhaust. 

Suffer me, then, to incite you betimes to engage in the 
true worship of God. If sin hide him from you, forsake 
sin by repentance and turning to God. If mistake hide 
him, abandon mistake. Cast aside every weight, every 
easily besetting sin. Look unto Jesus, author and finisher 
of faith. Have you unsettled and vague notions in refer- 
ence to the Bible ? Let them speedily become settled. 
Have you sceptical doubts and difficulties ? Let them be 
resolved. .Do parts of the Christian scheme appear repug- 
nant to reason and right ? Discover your mistake, for you 
have not rightly apprehended that scheme. There are no 
parts which are not easily reconcilable with the simplest 
principles of common sense. Of course you will not un- 
derstand me to say, that the scope of the system does not 
reach out into the unknown, and take in future consequen- 
ces which we cannot measure. You will not suppose me 
to imply, that much of past history is not concealed from 
us. Far be it from us to affect infallibility or omniscience 



UNIVERSAL PRAISE. 357 

in regard to things unrevealed ; but it is in reference to 
tilings revealed that you will understand me to say, that 
they contain no part or portion repugnant to right reason, 
and that cannot be reconciled to the common sense of a 
child. Seek, then, for settled and satisfactory views of the 
Word of God and the Christian economy, and be sure that 
you never have found them so long as praise is a stranger 
to your heart. 

And while cherishing the outward means of worship, 
endeavor to complete and crown the whole by a life of 
praise. The highest praise you can render to a man is to 
embrace his views, yield to his requests, imitate his exam- 
ple, and promote his interests. So it is the highest form 
of praise to God when we yield our bodies and spirits 
living sacrifices to Christ, when we learn of him what to 
believe, when we imbibe his spirit and principles, when we 
strive to promote his interests. This is unspoken worship ; 
but O how eloquent ! It speaks louder than words. It 
reflects on men the glory of the Saviour when his image 
is formed in us. When we breathe his spirit, men take 
knowledge of us that we have been with Jesus. So let us 
worship him, and soon the day will come when all the earth 
will join and own him Lord. 



THE END. 




Cambridge : Stereotyped and Printed by Welch, Bigelow, & Co. 



H 134 82 4 



'"*, 






W ■ 

*0« 



; V 



F 1 ^ 



°o, **?*?<* A o° ^ -.-rr,^- <*> 



^ .♦ *m. -v A' 







1°^ 








^ 



^ * 




"^ 







^0 



* A* 







-bV 



v.* 






D ^ 






^ .'ttfeft %/ :Mki \S 









*0$ 

5°^ 




L 4> .- 



<> '' 




* J 9 V •• 




2T * 











^*« • » • a, 






v ** % • 



>^/V^ 









*^^y v^-> \/W'y 






«3^ s « « e^ ' 






• ^ A* *-^^^» ^*r» <£ *rf{ Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
i ° V>»^ v » ,s£=3pa83g§, •■ v ^f» C ? e iSN Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Dvirte 



«^ ^ 0» V *Kj Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

: -.15 Treatment Date: July 2005 

W? % * 6** ^ *?,T- a* *< **♦ Pr eservationTechnologies 

^ t «# ^ 4> «••. *^» AW< ""-D LEADER ,N PAPER PRESERVAT.ON 

f »*^!* '^5 ^* »t^vt* ^ m Thomson Park Dnve 

* £&n[M>d*>-» -» A* * ^S^NMf^* "^ Cranberry Township. PA 16066 

htf *SmftSp* °v *°^m^* (724) 779 - 2111 






'• « 



.o^> 



(724) 779-21 1 1 
















9 Vfc. : 



^V 




























* • 













• A>0 - 






* 4? «*\ 



• ♦♦ 






- 














i* v •t^Lt*_ -^ 






<t>o« 



_; , 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





014 476 781 



